Suprapubic versus transurethral catheterization for bladder drainage in male rectal cancer surgery (GRECCAR10), a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Bladder drainage is systematically used in rectal cancer surgery; however, the optimal type of drainage, transurethral catheterization (TUC) or suprapubic catheterization (SPC), is still controversial. The aim was to compare the rates of urinary tract infection on the fourth postoperative day (POD4) between TUC and SPC, after rectal cancer surgery regardless of the day of removal of the urinary drain. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial in 19 expert colorectal surgery centers in France and Belgium was performed between October 2016 and October 2019 and included 240 men (with normal or subnormal voiding function) undergoing mesorectal excision with low anastomosis for rectal cancer. Patients were followed at postoperative days 4, 30, and 180. RESULTS: In 208 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 58-71]) randomized to TUC (n = 99) or SPC (n = 109), the rate of urinary infection at POD4 was not significantly different whatever the type of drainage (11/99 (11.1%) vs. 8/109 (7.3%), 95% CI, - 4.2% to 11.7%; p = 0.35). There was significantly more pyuria in the TUC group (79/99 (79.0%) vs. (60/109 (60.9%), 95% CI, 5.7-30.0%; p = 0.004). No difference in bacteriuria was observed between the groups. Patients in the TUC group had a shorter duration of catheterization (median 4 [2-5] vs. 4 [3-5] days; p = 0.002). Drainage complications were more frequent in the SPC group at all followup visits. CONCLUSIONS: TUC should be preferred over SPC in male patients undergoing surgery for mid and/or lower rectal cancers, owing to the lower rate of complications and shorter duration of catheterization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02922647.

Risk factors for severe morbidity and definitive stoma after elective surgery for sigmoid diverticulitis: a multicenter national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In the decision to perform elective surgery, it is of great interest to have data about the outcomes of surgery to individualize patients who could safely undergo sigmoid resection. The aim of this study was to provide information on the outcomes of elective sigmoid resection for sigmoid diverticular disease (SDD) at a national level. METHODS: All consecutive patients who had elective surgery for SDD (2010-2021) were included in this retrospective, multicenter, cohort study. Patients were identified from institutional review board-approved databases in French member centers of the French Surgical Association. The endpoints of the study were the early and the long-term postoperative outcomes and an evaluation of the risk factors for 90-day severe postoperative morbidity and a definitive stoma after an elective sigmoidectomy for SDD. RESULTS: In total, 4617 patients were included. The median [IQR] age was 61 [18.0;100] years, the mean ± SD body mass index (BMI) was 26.8 ± 4 kg/m2, and 2310 (50%) were men. The indications for surgery were complicated diverticulitis in 50% and smoldering diverticulitis in 47.4%. The procedures were performed laparoscopically for 88% and with an anastomosis for 83.8%. The severe complication rate on postoperative day 90 was 11.7%, with a risk of anastomotic leakage of 4.7%. The independent risk factors in multivariate analysis were an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ 3, an open approach, and perioperative blood transfusion. Age, perioperative blood transfusion, and Hartmann's procedure were the three independent risk factors for a permanent stoma. CONCLUSIONS: This series provides a real-life picture of elective sigmoidectomy for SDD at a national level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Comité National Information et Liberté (CNIL) (n°920361).

Laparoscopic versus open resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma: nationwide analysis.

BACKGROUND: The relevance of laparoscopic resection of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) remains debated. The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic (LLR) and open (OLR) liver resection for ICC, with specific focus on textbook outcome and lymph node dissection (LND). METHODS: Patients undergoing LLR or OLR for ICC were included from two French, nationwide hepatopancreatobiliary surveys undertaken between 2000 and 2017. Patients with negative margins, and without transfusion, severe complications, prolonged hospital stay, readmission or death were considered to have a textbook outcome. Patients who achieved both a textbook outcome and LND were deemed to have an adjusted textbook outcome. OLR and LLR were compared after propensity score matching. RESULTS: In total, 548 patients with ICC (127 LLR, 421 OLR) were included. Textbook-outcome and LND completion rates were 22.1 and 48.2 per cent respectively. LLR was independently associated with a decreased rate of LND (odds ratio 0.37, 95 per cent c.i. 0.20 to 0.69). After matching, 109 patients remained in each group. LLR was associated with a decreased rate of transfusion (7.3 versus 21.1 per cent; P = 0.001) and shorter hospital stay (median 7 versus 14 days; P = 0.001), but lower rate of LND (33.9 versus 73.4 per cent; P = 0.001). Patients who underwent LLR had lower rate of adjusted TO completion than patients who had OLR (6.5 versus 17.4 per cent; P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic approach did not substantially improve quality of care of patients with resectable ICC.

Long-term outcomes of Hartmann's procedure versus primary anastomosis for generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis: follow-up of a prospective multicenter randomized trial (DIVERTI).

BACKGROUND: Surgical management of Hinchey III and IV diverticulitis involves Hartmann's procedure (HP) or primary resection anastomosis (PRA) with or without fecal diversion. These procedures were evaluated in four randomized controlled trials. Early results from these trials demonstrated similar rates of complications but higher rates of colonic restoration after PRA than HP. Long-term follow-up has not been reported to date. The aim of this study was to analyze long-term outcomes and quality of life (QoL) in patients previously enrolled in a prospective randomized trial comparing HP and PRA for generalized peritonitis due to perforated diverticulitis (DIVERTI trial). STUDY DESIGN: Follow-up data were available for 78 of 102 patients. Demographic data, incisional hernia rate, need for additional surgery related to the primary procedure, and QoL were recorded. RESULTS: The overall survival rate was 76% and did not differ between the two groups. Incisional hernia was reported in 21 (52%) patients in the HP arm and in 11 (29%) patients in the PRA arm (p = 0.035). The HP arm demonstrated significantly lower SF-36 physical and mental component scores. The mean general QoL (EQ-VAS) and mean EQ-5D index scores were better after PRA than after HP, but this difference was not statistically significant. The results of GIQLI, which measures intestine-specific QOL, did not differ between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This follow-up study with a median follow-up time of > 9 years among living patients indicates that PRA for perforated diverticulitis is associated with fewer long-term complications and better QoL than HP. PRA significantly reduced the incisional hernia rate and the need for reoperation. Long-term survival was not jeopardized by the PRA approach. Future studies are needed to address the utility of protective stoma.

Time from first seen in specialist care to surgery does not influence survival outcome in patients with upfront resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the impact of time to surgery (TTS) on overall survival (OS), disease free survival (DFS) and postoperative complication rate in patients with upfront resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA). METHODS: We retrospectively included patients who underwent upfront surgery for PA between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2014 from four French centers. TTS was defined as the number of days between the date of the first consultation in specialist care and the date of surgery. DFS for a 14-day TTS was the primary endpoint. We also analyzed survival depending on different delay cut-offs (7, 14, 28, 60 and 75 days). RESULTS: A total of 168 patients were included. 59 patients (35%) underwent an upfront surgery within 14 days. Patients in the higher delay group (> 14 days) had significantly more vein resections and endoscopic biliary drainage. Adjusted OS (p = 0.44), DFS (p = 0.99), fistulas (p = 0.41), hemorrhage (p = 0.59) and severe post-operative complications (p = 0.82) were not different according to TTS (> 14 days). Other delay cut-offs had no impact on OS or DFS. DISCUSSION: TTS seems to have no impact on OS, DFS and 90-day postoperative morbidity.

Perioperative FOLFOX 4 Versus FOLFOX 4 Plus Cetuximab Versus Immediate Surgery for High-Risk Stage II and III Colon Cancers: A Phase II Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial (PRODIGE 22).

BACKGROUND: Perioperative chemotherapy has proven valuable in several tumors, but not in colon cancer (CC). OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of perioperative chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced nonmetastatic CC. METHODS: This is a French multicenter randomized phase II trial in patients with resectable high-risk T3, T4, and/or N2 CC on baseline computed tomography (CT) scan. Patients were randomized to receive either 6 months of adjuvant FOLFOX after colectomy (control) or perioperative FOLFOX for 4 cycles before surgery and 8 cycles after (FOLFOX peri-op). In RAS wild-type patients, a third arm testing perioperative FOLFOX-cetuximab was added. Tumor Regression Grade (TRG1) of Ryan et al was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints were toxicity, perioperative morbidity, and quality of surgery. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were enrolled. At interim analysis, the FOLFOX-cetuximab arm was stopped (lack of efficacy). The remaining 104 patients (control, n = 52; FOLFOX preop n = 52) represented our intention-to-treat population. In the FOLFOX perioperative group, 96% received the scheduled 4 cycles before surgery. R0 resection and complete mesocolic excision rate were 94% and 93%, respectively. Overall mortality and morbidity rates were similar in both groups. Perioperative FOLFOX chemotherapy did not improve major pathological response rate (TRG1 = 8%) but was associated with a significant pathological regression (TRG1-2 = 44% vs 8%, P < 0.001) and a trend to tumor downstaging as compared to the control group. CT scan criteria were associated with a 33% rate of overstaging in control group. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative FOLFOX for locally advanced resectable CC is feasible with an acceptable tolerability but is not associated with an increased major pathological response rate as expected. However, perioperative FOLFOX induces pathological regression and downstaging. Better preoperative staging tools are needed to decrease the risk of overtreating patients.

Prevention of biliary fistula after partial hepatectomy by transcystic biliary drainage: randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Biliary fistula is one of the most common complications after hepatectomy. This study evaluated the effect of transcystic biliary drainage during hepatectomy on the occurrence of postoperative biliary fistula. METHODS: This multicentre RCT was carried out from 2009 to 2016 in nine centres. Patients were randomized to transcystic biliary drainage or no transcystic drainage (control). Patients underwent hepatectomy (more than 2 segments) of non-cirrhotic livers. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of biliary fistula after surgery. Secondary endpoints were morbidity, postoperative mortality, duration of hospital stay, reoperation, readmission to hospital, and complications caused by catheters. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 310 patients were randomized. In intention-to-treat analysis, there were 158 patients in the transcystic group and 149 in the control group. Seven patients were removed from the per-protocol analysis owing to protocol deviations. The biliary fistula rate was 5·9 per cent in intention-to-treat and 6·0 per cent in per-protocol analyses. The rate was similar in the transcystic and control groups (5·7 versus 6·0 per cent; P = 1·000). There were no differences in terms of morbidity (49·4 versus 46·3 per cent; P = 0·731), mortality (2·5 versus 4·7 per cent; P = 0·367) and reoperations (4·4 versus 10·1 per cent; P = 1·000). Median duration of hospital stay was longer in the transcystic group (11 versus 10 days; P = 0·042). The biliary fistula risk was associated with the width and length of the hepatic cut surface. CONCLUSION: This randomized trial did not demonstrate superiority of transcystic drainage during hepatectomy in preventing biliary fistula. The use of transcystic drainage during hepatectomy to prevent postoperative biliary fistula is not recommended. Registration number: NCT01469442 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

ANTECEDENTES: La fístula biliar es una de las complicaciones más comunes después de la hepatectomía. Este estudio evalúa el efecto del drenaje biliar transcístico durante la hepatectomía en la aparición de una fístula biliar postoperatoria. MÉTODOS: Este ensayo prospectivo aleatorizado y multicéntrico (Clinical Trial NCT01469442) con dos grupos de estudio (grupo transcístico versus grupo control) se llevó a cabo de 2009 a 2016 en 9 centros. Los pacientes fueron sometidos a una hepatectomía (≥ 2 segmentos) en hígados no cirróticos. El resultado principal fue la aparición de una fístula biliar después de la cirugía. Los resultados secundarios fueron la morbilidad, la mortalidad postoperatoria, la duración de la estancia hospitalaria, la reintervención, la necesidad de reingreso y las complicaciones causadas por los catéteres. Se realizaron análisis por intención de tratamiento y por protocolo. RESULTADOS: Un total de 310 pacientes fueron randomizados. Por intención de tratamiento, 158 pacientes fueron aleatorizados al grupo transcístico y 149 al grupo control. Siete pacientes fueron excluidos del análisis por protocolo por desviaciones del protocolo. La tasa de fístula biliar fue del 5,9% en el análisis por intención de tratamiento y del 6,0% en el análisis por protocolo. Esta tasa fue similar para el grupo transcístico y para el grupo control: 5,7% versus 6,0% (P = 1). No hubo diferencias en términos de morbilidad (49,4% versus 46,9%, P = 0,731), mortalidad (2,5% versus 4,7%, P = 0,367) y reintervenciones (4,4% versus 10,1%, P = 1). La mediana de la duración de la estancia hospitalaria fue mayor para el grupo transcístico (11 versus 10 días, P = 0,042). El riesgo de fístula biliar se correlacionó con el grosor y la longitud de la transección hepática. CONCLUSIÓN: Este ensayo aleatorizado no demuestra la superioridad del drenaje transcístico durante la hepatectomía para prevenir la fístula biliar. No se recomienda el uso de drenaje transcístico durante la hepatectomía para prevenir la fístula biliar postoperatoria.

Impact of cirrhosis in patients undergoing laparoscopic liver resection in a nationwide multicentre survey.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to analyse the impact of cirrhosis on short-term outcomes after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR) in a multicentre national cohort study. METHODS: This retrospective study included all patients undergoing LLR in 27 centres between 2000 and 2017. Cirrhosis was defined as F4 fibrosis on pathological examination. Short-term outcomes of patients with and without liver cirrhosis were compared after propensity score matching by centre volume, demographic and tumour characteristics, and extent of resection. RESULTS: Among 3150 patients included, LLR was performed in 774 patients with (24·6 per cent) and 2376 (75·4 per cent) without cirrhosis. Severe complication and mortality rates in patients with cirrhosis were 10·6 and 2·6 per cent respectively. Posthepatectomy liver failure (PHLF) developed in 3·6 per cent of patients with cirrhosis and was the major cause of death (11 of 20 patients). After matching, patients with cirrhosis tended to have higher rates of severe complications (odds ratio (OR) 1·74, 95 per cent c.i. 0·92 to 3·41; P = 0·096) and PHLF (OR 7·13, 0·91 to 323·10; P = 0·068) than those without cirrhosis. They also had a higher risk of death (OR 5·13, 1·08 to 48·61; P = 0·039). Rates of cardiorespiratory complications (P = 0·338), bile leakage (P = 0·286) and reoperation (P = 0·352) were similar in the two groups. Patients with cirrhosis had a longer hospital stay than those without (11 versus 8 days; P = 0·018). Centre expertise was an independent protective factor against PHLF in patients with cirrhosis (OR 0·33, 0·14 to 0·76; P = 0·010). CONCLUSION: Underlying cirrhosis remains an independent risk factor for impaired outcomes in patients undergoing LLR, even in expert centres.

ANTECEDENTES: El objetivo de este estudio fue analizar el impacto de la cirrosis en los resultados a corto plazo después de la resección hepática laparoscópica (laparoscopic liver resection, LLR) en un estudio de cohortes multicéntrico nacional. MÉTODOS: Este estudio retrospectivo incluyó todos los pacientes sometidos a LLR en 27 centros entre 2000 y 2017. La cirrosis se definió como fibrosis F4 en el examen histopatológico. Los resultados a corto plazo de los pacientes con hígado cirrótico (cirrhotic liver CL) (pacientes CL) y los pacientes con hígado no cirrótico (non-cirrhotic liver, NCL) (pacientes NCL) se compararon después de realizar un emparejamiento por puntaje de propension del volumen del centro, las características demográficas y del tumor, y la extensión de la resección. RESULTADOS: Del total de 3.150 pacientes incluidos, se realizó LLR en 774 (24,6%) pacientes CL y en 2.376 (75,4%) pacientes NCL. Las tasas de complicaciones graves y mortalidad en el grupo de pacientes CL fueron del 10,6% y 2,6%, respectivamente. La insuficiencia hepática posterior a la hepatectomía (post-hepatectomy liver failure, PHLF) fue la principal causa de mortalidad (55% de los casos) y se produjo en el 3,6% de los casos en pacientes CL. Después del emparejamiento, los pacientes CL tendieron a tener tasas más altas de complicaciones graves (razón de oportunidades, odds ratio, OR 1,74; i.c. del 95% 0,92-0,41; P = 0,096) y de PHLF (OR 7,13; i.c. del 95% 0,91-323,10; P = 0,068) en comparación con los pacientes NCL. Los pacientes CL estuvieron expuestos a un mayor riesgo de mortalidad (OR 5,13; i.c. del 95% 1,08-48,6; P = 0,039) en comparación con los pacientes NCL. Los pacientes CL presentaron tasas similares de complicaciones cardiorrespiratorias graves (P = 0,338), de fuga biliar (P = 0,286) y de reintervenciones (P = 0,352) que los pacientes NCL. Los pacientes CL tuvieron una estancia hospitalaria más larga (11 versus 8 días; P = 0,018) que los pacientes NCL. La experiencia del centro fue un factor protector independiente de PHLF (OR 0,33; i.c. del 95% 0,14-0,76; P = 0,010) pacientes CL. CONCLUSIÓN: La presencia de cirrosis subyacente sigue siendo un factor de riesgo independiente de peores resultados en pacientes sometidos a resección hepática laparoscópica, incluso en centros con experiencia.

Correction to: Incidence and Risk Factors for Severity of Postoperative Ileus After Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Registry Data Analysis.

In the list of participating investigators that appears in Acknowledgements, one of the investigators names appears incorrectly.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Severity of Postoperative Ileus After Colorectal Surgery: A Prospective Registry Data Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Defining severe postoperative ileus in terms of consequences could help physicians standardize the management of this condition. The recently described classification based on consequences requires further investigation. The aim of this study was to obtain a snapshot of postoperative ileus in patients undergoing colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs and to identify factors associated with non-severe and severe postoperative ileus. METHODS: This prospective registry data analysis was conducted in 40 centers in five different countries. A total of 786 patients scheduled for colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs were included. The primary endpoint was the incidence rate of postoperative ileus as defined by Vather et al. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients experienced postoperative ileus (15.4%). Non-severe POI occurred in 48 patients (6.1%), and severe postoperative ileus occurred in 73 patients (9.3%). In multivariate analysis, the male gender and intra-abdominal complications were associated with severe postoperative ileus: odd ratio (OR) = 2.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-3.59], p = 0.01 and OR = 3.60 [95% CI 1.75-7.40], p < 0.0001, respectively. Conversely, open laparotomy and urinary retention were associated with non-severe POI: OR = 3.03 [95% CI 1.37-6.72], p = 0.006 and OR = 2.70 [95% CI 0.89-8.23], p = 0.08, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative ileus occurred in 15% of patients after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programs. For 60% of patients, this was considered severe. The physiopathology of these two entities could be different, severe POI being linked to intraabdominal complication, while non-severe POI being linked with risk factors for "primary" POI. The physician should pay attention to male patients having POI after colorectal surgery and look for features evocating intraabdominal complications.

Surgical technique for placement of the automated low flow ascites pump (Alfapump).

Approximately 10% of patients with ascites associated with cirrhosis fail to respond to dietary rules and diuretic treatment and therefore present with refractory ascites. In order to avoid iterative large-volume paracentesis in patients with contraindication to TIPS, the automated low flow ascites pump system (Alfapump) was developed to pump ascites from the peritoneal cavity into the urinary bladder, where it is eliminated spontaneously by normal micturition. This manuscript reports the surgical technique for placement of the Alfapump.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of stent type in endoscopic treatment of gastric leak after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Gastric leak is the most feared surgical postoperative complication after sleeve gastrectomy. An endoscopic procedure is usually required to treat the leak. No data are available on the cost-effectiveness of different stent types in this procedure. METHODS: Between April 2005 and July 2016, patients with a confirmed gastric leak undergoing endoscopic treatment using a covered stent (CS) or double-pigtail stent (DPS) were included. The primary objective of the study was to assess overall costs of the stent types after primary sleeve gastrectomy. Secondary objectives were the cost-effectiveness of each stent type expressed as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER); the incremental net benefit; the probability of efficiency, defined as the probability of being cost-effective at a threshold of €30 000, and identification of the key drivers of ICER derived from a multivariable analysis. RESULTS: One hundred and twelve patients were enrolled. The overall mean costs of gastric leak were €22 470; the mean(s.d.) cost was €24 916(12 212) in the CS arm and €20 024(3352) in the DPS arm (P = 0·018). DPS was more cost-effective than CS (ICER €4743 per endoscopic procedure avoided), with an incremental net benefit of €25 257 and a 27 per cent probability of efficiency. Key drivers of the ICER were the inpatient ward after diagnosis of gastric leak (surgery versus internal medicine), type of institution (private versus public) and duration of hospital stay per endoscopic procedure. CONCLUSION: DPS for the treatment of gastric leak is more cost-effective than CS and should be proposed as the standard regimen whenever possible.

Use of aspirin and bleeding-related complications after hepatic resection.

BACKGROUND: The operative risk of hepatectomy under antiplatelet therapy is unknown. This study sought to assess the outcomes of elective hepatectomy performed with or without aspirin continuation in a well balanced matched cohort. METHODS: Data were retrieved from a multicentre prospective observational study. Aspirin and control groups were compared by non-standardized methods and by propensity score (PS) matching analysis. The main outcome was severe (Dindo-Clavien grade IIIa or more) haemorrhage. Other outcomes analysed were intraoperative transfusion, overall haemorrhage, major morbidity, comprehensive complication index (CCI) score, thromboembolic complications, ischaemic complications and mortality. RESULTS: Before matching, there were 118 patients in the aspirin group and 1685 in the control group. ASA fitness grade, cardiovascular disease, previous history of angina pectoris, angioplasty, diabetes, use of vitamin K antagonists, cirrhosis and type of hepatectomy were significantly different between the groups. After PS matching, 108 patients were included in each group. There were no statistically significant differences between the aspirin and control groups in severe haemorrhage (6·5 versus 5·6 per cent respectively; odds ratio (OR) 1·18, 95 per cent c.i. 0·38 to 3·62), intraoperative transfusion (23·4 versus 23·7 per cent; OR 0·98, 0·51 to 1·87), overall haemorrhage (10·2 versus 12·0 per cent; OR 0·83, 0·35 to 1·94), CCI score (24 versus 28; P = 0·520), major complications (23·1 versus 13·9 per cent; OR 1·82, 0·92 to 3·79) and 90-day mortality (5·6 versus 4·6 per cent; OR 1·21, 0·36 to 4·09). CONCLUSION: This observational study suggested that aspirin continuation is not associated with a higher rate of bleeding-related complications after elective hepatic surgery.

Multicentre study of laparoscopic or open assessment of the peritoneal cancer index (BIG-RENAPE).

BACKGROUND: The peritoneal cancer index (PCI) is a comparative prognostic factor for colorectal peritoneal metastasis (CRPM). The ability of laparoscopy to determine the PCI in consideration of cytoreductive surgery remains undetermined, and this study was designed to compare it with laparotomy. METHODS: A prospective multicentre study was conducted for patients with no known CRPM, but at risk of peritoneal disease. Surgery began with laparoscopic exploration followed by open exploration to determine the PCI. Concordance between laparoscopic and open assessment was evaluated for the diagnosis of CRPM and for the PCI. RESULTS: Among 50 patients evaluated, CRPM recurrence was found in 29 (58 per cent) and 34 (68 per cent) at laparoscopic and open surgery respectively. Laparoscopy was feasible in 88 per cent (44 of 50) and deemed satisfactory by the surgeon in 52 per cent (26 of 50). Among the 25 evaluable patients with satisfactory laparoscopy, there was concordance of 96 per cent (24 of 25 patients) and 38 per cent (10 of 25) for laparoscopic and open assessment of CRPM and the PCI respectively. Where there were discrepancies, it was laparoscopy that underestimated the PCI. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy may underestimate the extent of CRPM.

Risk score to predict biliary leakage after elective liver resection.

BACKGROUND: Biliary leakage remains a major cause of morbidity after liver resection. Previous prognostic studies of posthepatectomy biliary leakage (PHBL) lacked power, population homogeneity, and model validation. The present study aimed to develop a risk score for predicting severe PHBL. METHODS: In this multicentre observational study, patients who underwent liver resection without hepaticojejunostomy in one of nine tertiary centres between 2012 and 2015 were randomly assigned to a development or validation cohort in a 2 : 1 ratio. A model predicting severe PHBL (International Study Group of Liver Surgery grade B/C) was developed and further validated. RESULTS: A total of 2218 procedures were included. PHBL of any severity and severe PHBL occurred in 141 (6·4 per cent) and 92 (4·1 per cent) patients respectively. In the development cohort (1475 patients), multivariable analysis identified blood loss of at least 500 ml, liver remnant ischaemia time 45 min or more, anatomical resection including segment VIII, transection along the right aspect of the left intersectional plane, and associating liver partition and portal vein ligation for staged hepatectomy as predictors of severe PHBL. A risk score (ranging from 0 to 5) was built using the development cohort (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) 0·79, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·85) and tested successfully in the validation cohort (AUROC 0·70, 0·60 to 0·80). A score of at least 3 predicted an increase in severe PHBL (19·4 versus 2·6 per cent in the development cohort, P < 0·001; 15 versus 3·1 per cent in the validation cohort, P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: The present risk score reliably predicts severe PHBL. It represents a multi-institutionally validated prognostic tool that can be used to identify a subset of patients at high risk of severe PHBL after elective hepatectomy.

What are the predictive factors of caecal perforation in patients with obstructing distal colon cancer?

AIM: In the presence of large bowel obstruction, the choice of treatment is determined by the patient's general status, the tumour characteristics and the perceived risk of caecal perforation. This study was designed to evaluate the predictive factors of impending caecal perforation, and also investigated the use of caecal volumetry. METHOD: From January 2011 to June 2016, patients with obstructive distal colon cancer undergoing emergency laparotomy, for whom a pretreatment CT scan was available, were included in this retrospective, case-control, two-centre study. Two patient groups were defined: patients with and without impending caecal perforation. The primary end-point of the study was a determination of predictive factors for caecal perforation. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients (45 men, 62.5%) were included. Univariate analysis revealed that the presence of pericaecal fluid (P < 0.0001), caecal pneumatosis (P < 0.0001), mean maximum caecal diameter (P = 0.001), mean caecal diameter at the ileocaecal junction (P = 0.0001) and mean caecal volume (P = 0.001) were associated with caecal perforation. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed that a caecal volume greater than 400 cm3 (P < 0.0001), a maximum caecal diameter > 9 cm (P = 0.002) and a caecal diameter at the ileocaecal junction > 7.5 cm (P = 0.001) were associated with impending caecal perforation. In multivariate analysis, only caecal volume > 400 cm3 (P = 0.001) was correlated with the risk of impending caecal perforation. CONCLUSION: Caecal volumetry is an easy and useful tool to predict impending caecal perforation in patients with large bowel obstruction.

Distinguishing fecal appendicular peritonitis from purulent appendicular peritonitis.

INTRODUCTION: Fecal appendicular peritonitis (FAP) is a poorly studied, rare form of acute appendicitis, corresponding to peritoneal inflammation with the presence of feces secondary to ruptured appendix. The purpose of this study was to describe FAP and to compare FAP with purulent appendicular peritonitis (PAP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This single-center, retrospective study was conducted in consecutive patients to compare the FAP group and the PAP group. The primary endpoint was the 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality according to the Clavien-Dindo classification. The secondary endpoints were description and comparison of intraoperative data (laparoscopy rate, conversion rate, type of procedure and the mean operating time), and short-term outcomes (types of complications, length of stay, readmission rate, and reoperation rate), comparison of intraoperative bacteriological samples of FAP and PAP as well as the rate of resistance to amoxicillin and clavulanic acid, used as routine postoperative antibiotic therapy. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and January 2016, 2.2% of appendectomies were performed for FAP. Patients of the FAP group reported a longer history of pain than patients of the PAP group (mean: 58 h [range: 24-120] vs 24 h [range: 6-504], p = 0.0001) and hyperthermia was more frequent in the FAP group than in the PAP group (72% vs 26%, p = 0.0001). Mean preoperative CRP was also higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (110 mg/L [range: 67-468] vs 37.5 mg/L [range: 3.1-560], p = 0.007). Significantly less patients were operated by laparoscopy in the FAP group (89.7% vs 96.6%, p < 0.0001). Mean length of stay was significantly longer in the FAP group than in the PAP group (10 days [range: 3-24] vs 5 days [range: 1-32], p = 0.001). The overall 30-day complication rate was significantly higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (62.1% vs 24.7%, p = 0.0005). The readmission rate was not significantly different between the two groups (14% vs 11.2%, p = 0.2), but the reoperation rate was higher in the FAP group than in the PAP group (31% vs 11%, p = 0.01). No significant difference was observed between the FAP and PAP groups in terms of the positive culture rate (75.9% vs 65.6%, p = 0.3). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of resistance to amoxicillin and clavulanic acid (18.2% vs 20.5%, p = 0.8). CONCLUSION: FAP is associated with significantly more severe morbidity compared to PAP. Clinicians must be familiar with this form of appendicitis in order to adequately inform their patients.

Multicentre study of the impact of morbidity on long-term survival following hepatectomy for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The impact of morbidity on long-term outcomes following liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma is currently unclear. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients who underwent liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma with curative intent in 24 university hospitals between 1989 and 2009. Severe morbidity was defined as any complication of Dindo-Clavien grade III or IV. Patients with severe morbidity were compared with those without in terms of demographics, pathology, management, morbidity, overall survival, disease-free survival and time to recurrence. Independent predictors of severe morbidity were identified by multivariable analysis. RESULTS: A total of 522 patients were enrolled. Severe morbidity occurred in 113 patients (21·6 per cent) and was an independent predictor of overall survival (hazard ratio 1·64, 95 per cent c.i. 1·21 to 2·23), as were age at resection, multifocal disease, positive lymph node status and R0 resection margin. Severe morbidity did not emerge as an independent predictor of disease-free survival. Independent predictors of time to recurrence included severe morbidity, tumour size, multifocal disease, vascular invasion and R0 resection margin. Major hepatectomy and intraoperative transfusion were independent predictors of severe morbidity. CONCLUSION: Severe morbidity adversely affects overall survival following liver resection for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.