Single stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis. Lesson learnt from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Introduction: Choledocholithiasis, a common complication of gallstone disease, poses significant risks including cholangitis and pancreatitis. Various treatment approaches exist, including single-stage and two-stage techniques, with recent literature suggesting advantages of the single-stage approach in terms of outcomes and cost-effectiveness. This study evaluates the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of single-stage laparoscopic cholecystectomy combined with intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (LC + iERCP) compared to the previously adopted two-stage approach. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients undergoing single-stage LC + iERCP for cholecysto-choledocholithiasis during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020-2022). Data on demographics, preoperative assessments, intraoperative parameters, and postoperative outcomes were collected and compared with an historical control group undergoing the two-stage approach (LC + preopERCP). Hospitalization costs were also compared between the two groups. Results: A total of 190 patients were included, with 105 undergoing single-stage LC + iERCP. The single-stage approach demonstrated successful completion without cystic duct cannulation, with no conversions to open surgery. Operative time was comparable to the two-stage approach, while hospital stay, and costs were significantly lower in the single-stage group. Complication rates were similar between the groups. Conclusions: Single-stage LC + iERCP appears to be a feasible, effective, and safe approach for treating cholecysto-choledocholithiasis, offering potential benefits in terms of reduced hospital stay, OR occupation time, and costs compared to the two-stage approach. Integration of this approach into clinical practice warrants consideration, unless there are logistical challenges that cannot be overcome or lack of endoscopic expertise also for treating challenging urgent cases.

ERAS Protocol Applied to Oncological Colorectal Mini-invasive Surgery Reduces the Surgical Stress Response and Improves Long-term Cancer-specific Survival.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are known to reduce postoperative complications and improve short-term outcomes by minimizing the surgical stress response (SSR). Retrospective reviews of large cohorts suggest that they may also have an impact on long-term oncological outcomes. In 2016, Mari et al published a randomized trial on ERAS protocol and the impact on the SSR; they found that IL-6 was less expressed in patients who undergo laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an ERAS protocol compared with controls. The aim of the present study is to report the long-term oncological outcomes of patients enrolled 5 years after the conclusion of the study. METHODS: Patients enrolled had received the indication for major colorectal surgery, aged between 18 and 80 years, with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grades I to III, autonomous for mobilization and walking, eligible for laparoscopic technique. In total, 140 patients were enrolled and randomized into 2 groups of 70 patients each. Among these patients, 52 in the ERAS group (EG) and 53 in the Standard group (SG) had colorectal cancer. For them, a 5-year oncological follow-up according to the NCCN 16 guidelines was planned. IL-6, C-reactive protein, prolactine, white blood cell count, albumin, and prealbumin were compared between oncological patients in the EG and in the SG. RESULTS: EG showed lower IL-6 on postoperative day 1 (21.2±9.1 vs. 40.3 ±11.3; P <0.05) and on day 5 (14.9±6.2 vs. 38.7±8.9; P <0.05), lower C-reactive protein on day 1 (48.3±15.7 vs. 89.4±20.3; P <0.05) and on day 5 (38.3±11.4 vs. 74.3±19.7; P <0.05), and lower pre-albumine on day 5 (18.9±7.2 vs. 12.3±6.9; P <0.05) compared with SG. Median oncological follow-up was 57 months [46.5 to 60]. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (log rank=0.195) and disease-free survival (Log rank=0.089) between groups. Cancer-specific survival was significantly better (log rank=0.038) in the EG compared with patients in the SG. CONCLUSIONS: ERAS protocol applied to colorectal laparoscopic surgery for cancer is able to minimize the SSR. As a possible result, cancer-specific survival seems to be improved in patients within enhanced protocols. However, even though there may be an association between an excess of SSR and worse oncological outcomes, the favorable effect of ERAS protocols toward better overall and disease-free survival is yet to be demonstrated.

Distant free air is not a contraindication for definitive laparoscopic treatment of acute perforated diverticulitis: a multi-center experience.

The paradigm of emergency laparotomy with sigmoid resection and protective stoma has been challenged for perforated diverticular disease (PDD) with free extraluminal air. Early clinical stabilization could lead to interval laparoscopic resection without stoma within 2 weeks from perforation. Patients admitted for acute diverticulitis underwent abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan. When free air was seen, endoluminal enema was administred. All patients underwent assessement of clinical stability. In unstable patients, upfront emergency surgery was performed. Stable patients underwent a conservative management consisting in fasting, central line intravenous fluids, antibiotic therapy, pain management, O2 therapy and percutaneous radiological drainage when indicated. In successful conservative management early interval surgery was planned within 15 days. Early delayed definitive laparoscopic treatment (EDDLT) was defined as laparoscopic resection of the affected colon without ostomy. A total of 235 patients were admitted to the emergency department for PDD. Among these, 142 had pericolic free air and were excluded from the study. Ninety-three had distant free air. Thirty-seven were hemodynamically unstable and underwent upfront surgery. Fifty-six patients showed a clinical stability and started on EDDLT. EDDLT was successfully performed in 36 patients (64.3%). In 20 patients (35.7%) EDDLT was unsuccessful. At multivariate analysis, distant CT extravasation of endoluminal contrast was independently associated with unsuccessful EDDLT (OR 2.1, CI 0.94-5.32). Patients with distant extraluminal free air after PDD may be treated with early delayed surgery after intensive medical therapy. Distant spread of endoluminal contrast at CT was a risk factor for unsuccessful EDDLT often indicating fecal peritonitis.