Total Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Standard Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation in Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Comparison of Short- and Long-term Oncologic Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of neoadjuvant multi-agent systemic chemotherapy and radiation (TNT) vs neoadjuvant single-agent chemoradiation (nCRT) and multi-agent adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival (OS), tumor downstaging, and circumferential resection margin (CRM) status in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Outside of clinical trials and small institutional reports, there is a paucity of data regarding the short and long-term oncologic impact of TNT as compared to nCRT. METHODS: Adult patients with stage II-III rectal adenocarcinoma were identified in the National Cancer Database [2006-2015]. RESULTS: Out of 8,548 patients, 36% received TNT and 64% nCRT. In the cohort, 13% had a pCR and 20% a neoadjuvant rectal (NAR) score <8. In multivariable analysis, as compared to nCRT, TNT demonstrated numerically higher pCR rates ( P = 0.05) but had similar incidence of positive CRM ( P = 0.11). Similar results were observed with NAR scores <8 as the primary endpoint. After adjusting for confounders, OS was comparable between the 2 groups. Additional factors independently associated with lower OS included male gender, uninsured status, low income status, high comorbidity score, poorly differentiated tumors, abdominoperineal resection, and positive surgical margins (all P <0.01). In separate models, both pCR and a NAR score <8 were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSION: In this national cohort, TNT was not associated with better survival and/or CRM negative status in comparison with nCRT, despite numerically higher downstaging rates. Further refinement of patient selection and treatment regimens are needed to establish effective neoadjuvant platforms to improve outcomes of patients with rectal cancer.

Abdominal Surgical Procedures in Adult Patients With Cystic Fibrosis: What Are the Risks?

BACKGROUND: With advances in medical care, patients with cystic fibrosis are more commonly living into adulthood, yet there are limited data describing the need for GI surgery and its outcomes in adult cystic fibrosis patients. OBJECTIVE: We aim to use a national administrative database to evaluate trends in abdominal GI surgery and associated postoperative outcomes among adult cystic fibrosis patients. DESIGN: This was a national retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A national all-payor administrative database from 2000 to 2014 was used. PATIENTS: Patients included adults (age ≥18 years) with cystic fibrosis undergoing abdominal GI surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was trend over time in number of surgical admissions. Secondary outcomes included morbidity and mortality by procedure type. RESULTS: We identified 3075 admissions for abdominal surgery, of which 28% were elective. Major GI surgical procedures increased over the study period ( p < 0.01), whereas appendectomy and cholecystectomy did not demonstrate a clear trend ( p = 0.90). The most common procedure performed was cholecystectomy ( n = 1280; 42%). The most common major surgery was segmental colectomy ( n = 535; 18%). Obstruction was the most common surgical indication ( n = 780; 26%). For major surgery, in-hospital mortality was 6%, morbidity was 37%, and mean length of stay was 15.9 days (SE 1.2). LIMITATIONS: The study is limited by a lack of granular physiological and clinical data within the administrative data source. CONCLUSIONS: Major surgical admissions for adult patients with cystic fibrosis are increasing, with the majority being nonelective. Major surgery is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and prolonged length of hospital stay. These findings may inform perioperative risk for adult patients with cystic fibrosis in need of GI surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B850 . PROCEDIMIENTOS QUIRRGICOS ABDOMINALES EN PACIENTES ADULTOS CON FIBROSIS QUSTICA CULES SON LOS RIESGOS: ANTECEDENTES:Con los avances en la medicina, los pacientes con fibrosis quística viven más comúnmente hasta la edad adulta, pero hay datos escasos que describan la necesidad de cirugía gastrointestinal y sus resultados en pacientes adultos con fibrosis quística.OBJETIVO:Nuestro objetivo es utilizar una base de datos administrativa nacional para evaluar las tendencias en la cirugía gastrointestinal abdominal y los resultados posoperatorios asociados entre los pacientes adultos con fibrosis quística.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo nacional.AJUSTE:Base de datos administrativa nacional de todas las instituciones pagadoras desde 2000 a 2014.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes adultos (edad> 18) con fibrosis quística sometidos a cirugía gastrointestinal abdominal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la tendencia a lo largo del tiempo en el número de ingresos quirúrgicos. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron morbilidad y mortalidad por tipo de procedimiento.RESULTADOS:Identificamos 3.075 ingresos por cirugía abdominal de los cuales el 28% fueron electivos. Los procedimientos quirúrgicos gastrointestinales mayores aumentaron durante el período de estudio (p <0,01) mientras que la apendicectomía y la colecistectomía no demostraron una tendencia clara (p = 0,90). El procedimiento realizado con mayor frecuencia fue la colecistectomía (n = 1.280; 42%). La cirugía mayor más común fue la colectomía segmentaria (n = 535; 18%). La obstrucción fue la indicación quirúrgica más común (n = 780; 26%). Para la cirugía mayor, la mortalidad hospitalaria fue del 6%, la morbilidad del 37% y la estadía media de 15,9 días (EE 1,2).LIMITACIONES:El estudio está limitado por la falta de datos clínicos y fisiológicos granulares dentro de la fuente de datos administrativos.CONCLUSIONES:Los ingresos quirúrgicos mayores de pacientes adultos con fibrosis quística están aumentando y la mayoría no son electivos. La cirugía mayor se asocia con una morbilidad y mortalidad significativas y una estancia hospitalaria prolongada. Estos hallazgos pueden informar el riesgo perioperatorio para pacientes adultos con fibrosis quística que necesitan cirugía gastrointestinal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B850 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

Colon and Rectal Cancer Management in Low-Resource Settings.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) incidence is rising in low- and middle-income countries, which also face disproportionate mortality from CRC, mainly due to diagnosis at late stages. Various challenges to CRC care exist at multiple societal levels in underserved populations. In this article, barriers to CRC care, strategies for screening, and treatment in resource-limited settings, and future directions are discussed within a global context.

Immunofluorescence in Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery.

The indocyanine green fluorescence imaging system is a surgical tool with increasing applications in colon and rectal surgery that has received growing acceptance in various surgical disciplines as a potentially valid method to enhance surgical field visualization, improve lymph node retrieval, and decrease anastomotic leak. Small noncomparative prospective trials have shown that intraoperative fluorescence imaging is a safe and feasible method to assess anastomotic perfusion and that its use may impact anastomotic leak rates. However, larger prospective and randomized studies are required to validate its role and impact in colorectal surgery. The purpose of this article is to review the current status of the use of immunofluorescence in colon and rectal surgery, as well as new applications in robotic colon and rectal resections.

Cost-effectiveness Evaluation of Laparoscopic Versus Robotic Minimally Invasive Colectomy.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the cost-effectiveness of open, laparoscopic, and robotic colectomy. BACKGROUND: The use of robotic-assisted colon surgery is increasing. Robotic technology is more expensive and whether a robotically assisted approach is cost-effective remains to be determined. METHODS: A decision-analytic model was constructed to evaluate the 1-year costs and quality-adjusted time between robotic, laparoscopic, and open colectomy. Model inputs were derived from available literature for costs, quality of life (QOL), and outcomes. Results are presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs), defined as incremental costs per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the effect of clinically reasonable variations in the inputs on our results. RESULTS: Open colectomy cost more and achieved lower QOL than robotic and laparoscopic approaches. From the societal perspective, robotic colectomy costs $745 more per case than laparoscopy, resulting in an ICER of $2,322,715/QALY because of minimal differences in QOL. From the healthcare sector perspective, robotics cost $1339 more per case with an ICER of $4,174,849/QALY. In both models, laparoscopic colectomy was more frequently cost-effective across a wide range of willingness-to-pay thresholds. Sensitivity analyses suggest robotic colectomy becomes cost-effective at $100,000/QALY if robotic disposable instrument costs decrease below $1341 per case, robotic operating room time falls below 172 minutes, or robotic hernia rate is less than 5%. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic and robotic colectomy are more cost-effective than open resection. Robotics can surpass laparoscopy in cost-effectiveness by achieving certain thresholds in QOL, instrument costs, and postoperative outcomes. With increased use of robotic technology in colorectal surgery, there is a burden to demonstrate these benefits.

Colorectal Lymphoma: A Contemporary Case Series.

BACKGROUND: Colon and rectal lymphomas are rare and can occur in the context of posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. Evidence-based management guidelines are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to characterize the presentation, diagnosis, and management of colorectal lymphoma and to identify differences within the transplant population. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of patients evaluated for colorectal lymphoma between 2000 and 2017. Patients were identified through clinical note queries. SETTINGS: Four hospitals within a single health system were included. PATIENTS: Fifty-two patients (64% men; mean age = 64 y; range, 26-91 y) were identified. No patient had <3 months of follow-up. Eight patients (15%) had posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival, recurrence, and complications in treatment pathway were measured. RESULTS: Most common presentations were rectal bleeding (27%), abdominal pain (23%), and diarrhea (23%). The most common location was the cecum (62%). Most frequent histologies were diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (48%) and mantle cell lymphoma (25%). Posttransplant lymphoproliferative disorder occurred in the cecum (n = 4) and rectum (n = 4). Twenty patients (38%) were managed with chemotherapy; 25 patients (48%) underwent primary resection. Mass lesions had a higher risk of urgent surgical resection (35% vs 8%; p = 0.017). Three patients (15%) treated with chemotherapy presented with perforation requiring emergency surgery. Overall survival was 77 months (range, 25-180 mo). Patients with cecal involvement had longer overall survival (96 vs 26 mo; p = 0.038); immunosuppressed patients had shorter survival (16 vs 96 mo; p = 0.006). Survival in patients treated with surgical management versus chemotherapy was similar (67 vs 105 mo; p = 0.62). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective chart review, with data limited by the contents of the medical chart. This was a small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal lymphoma is rare, with variable treatment approaches. Patients with noncecal involvement and chronic immunosuppression had worse overall survival. Patients with mass lesions, particularly cecal masses, are at higher risk to require urgent intervention, and primary resection should be considered. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A929.

System-Wide Improvement for Transitions After Ileostomy Surgery: Can Intensive Monitoring of Protocol Compliance Decrease Readmissions? A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission is common after ileostomy formation and frequently associated with dehydration. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to evaluate a previously published intervention to prevent dehydration and readmission. DESIGN: This is a randomized controlled trial. SETTING: This study was conducted in 3 hospitals within a single health care system. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing elective or nonelective ileostomy as part of their operative procedure were selected. INTERVENTION: Surgeons, advanced practice providers, inpatient and outpatient nurses, and wound ostomy continence nurses participated in a robust ileostomy education and monitoring program (Education Program for Prevention of Ileostomy Complications) based on the published intervention. After informed consent, patients were randomly assigned to a postoperative compliance surveillance and prompting strategy that was directed toward the care team, versus usual care. OUTCOME MEASURES: Unplanned hospital readmission within 30 days of discharge, readmission for dehydration, acute renal failure, estimated direct costs, and patient satisfaction were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: One hundred patients with an ileostomy were randomly assigned. The most common indications were rectal cancer (n = 26) and ulcerative colitis (n = 21), and 12 were emergency procedures. Although intervention patients had better postdischarge phone follow-up (90% vs 72%; p = 0.025) and were more likely to receive outpatient intravenous fluids (25% vs 6%; p = 0.008), they had similar overall hospital readmissions (20.4% vs 19.6%; p = 1.0), readmissions for dehydration (8.2% vs 5.9%; p = 0.71), and acute renal failure events (10.2% vs 3.9%; p = 0.26). Multivariable analysis found that weekend discharges to home were significantly associated with readmission (OR, 4.5 (95% CI, 1.2-16.9); p = 0.03). Direct costs and patient satisfaction were similar. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the heterogeneous patient population and by the potential effect of the intervention on providers taking care of patients randomly assigned to usual care. CONCLUSIONS: A surveillance strategy to ensure compliance with an ileostomy education program tracked patients more closely and was cost neutral, but did not result in decreased hospital readmissions compared with usual care. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A812.

Combined Hartmann's Reversal and Abdominal Wall Reconstruction: Defining Postoperative Morbidity.

BACKGROUND: Ventral hernias are common after Hartmann's procedure and add complexity to Hartmann's reversal. Colostomy reversal and abdominal wall reconstruction may be performed in a staged or concurrent fashion, although data are limited as to which strategy is optimal. We aimed to define the complication profile of concurrent abdominal wall reconstruction with colostomy reversal as compared to either procedure alone. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For this retrospective cohort study, we used the National Surgery Quality Improvement Project Database from 2012 to 2015. All patients undergoing elective colostomy reversal, abdominal wall reconstruction with component separation, or combined colostomy reversal with component separation were identified. Propensity score matching was used to compare outcomes among similar patients undergoing colostomy reversal alone versus combined procedure. Groups were evaluated for postoperative morbidity including reoperation. RESULTS: We identified 11,689 patients; 6951 (64%) underwent component separation alone, 4563 (35%) colostomy reversal alone, and 175 (1%) combined component separation and colostomy reversal. The combined group, as compared to colostomy reversal alone, showed an increased overall complication rate (39% versus 25%; P < 0.01) and increased rate of reoperation (9% versus 5%; P = 0.03). Differences in overall complication rate (43% versus 24%; P < 0.01) and reoperation rate (9% versus 3%; P = 0.03) persisted on propensity matched analysis. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis shows that in patients undergoing colostomy takedown, concurrent abdominal wall reconstruction is associated with increased morbidity including increased rate of reoperation, even when controlling for patient factors. Consideration may be given to a staged approach.

Incidence and predictors of incisional hernia after cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

Background and objectives: The incidence of incisional hernia (IH) after cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS/HIPEC) is largely unknown. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to identify patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC from 2001 to 2016. Patients were followed postoperatively for a minimum of two years. The primary outcome was the occurrence of an IH identified either on CT scan or physical examination. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to test associations with IH. Results: We identified 155 patients who underwent CRS/HIPEC; 26 patients (17%) were diagnosed with an IH at a median time of 245 days (Interquartile range [IQR] 175 - 331 days). On multivariable analysis, older age [50-64 vs. 18-49 years: hazard ratio (HR) = 0.08; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.01 to 0.64)], female gender (HR = 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.75), and increased BMI (>30 vs. <25; HR = 0.03; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.37) were significant independent predictors of IH. Conclusions: The incidence of IH in this high-risk patient population treated with CRS/HIPEC is similar to that after other abdominal cancer operations. Nevertheless, the occurrence of IH is an important patient outcome, so alternative closure techniques for reducing IH should be studied in this patient population. Synopsis In a single-institutional study, the incidence of incisional hernia was 17% after cytoreductive surgery plus hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy. Independent risk factors of incisional hernia were older age, female gender and obesity.

Workplace Exposures.

Workplace exposure in colorectal surgery is unique compared with other surgical specialties and generally underreported. Although the most common device-associated exposure in surgery is suture needle injury, colorectal surgeons are increasingly exposed to gastrointestinal-related infectious agents, radiation, and other hazards in multiple different clinical settings. Highlighting the unique workplace exposures in colorectal surgery may help increase awareness, improve education, and identify possible targets for early intervention in order to minimize these risks.

Decreased Use of Sphincter-Preserving Procedures Among African Americans with Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Improved multimodality rectal cancer treatment has increased the use of sphincter-preserving surgery. This study sought to determine whether African American (AA) patients with rectal cancer receive sphincter-preserving surgery at the same rate as non-AA patients. METHODS: The study used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample for years 1998-2012 to compare AA and non-AA patients with rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection. The logistic regression model was used to adjust for age, gender, admission type, Elixhauser comorbidity index, and hospital factors such as size, location (urban vs.rural), teaching status, and procedure volume. RESULTS: The search identified 22,697 patients, 1600 of whom were identified as AA. After adjustment for age and gender, the analysis showed that AA patients were less likely to undergo sphincter-preserving surgery than non-AA patients [odds ratio (OR) 0.70; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-0.78; p < 0.0001). After further adjustment for the Elixhauser comorbidity index, admission type, hospital-specific factors, and insurance status, the analysis showed that AA patients still were less likely to undergo sphincter-preserving surgery (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.70-0.87; p < 0.0001). Although the proportion of non-AA patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery increased during the study period (p = 0.0003), this trend was not significant for the AA patients (p = 0.13). CONCLUSION: In this data analysis, the AA patients with rectal cancer had lower rates of sphincter-preserving surgery than the non-AA patients, even after adjustment for patient- and hospital-specific factors. Further work is required to elucidate why. Eliminating racial disparities in rectal cancer treatment should continue to be a priority for the surgical community.

Does Hospital Transfer Impact Outcomes After Colorectal Surgery?

BACKGROUND: With increasing public reporting of outcomes and bundled payments, hospitals and providers are scrutinized for morbidity and mortality. The impact of patient transfer before colorectal surgery has not been well characterized in a risk-adjusted fashion. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that hospital-to-hospital transfer would independently predict morbidity and mortality beyond traditional predictor variables. DESIGN: We constructed a retrospective cohort of 158,446 patients who underwent colorectal surgery using the 2009-2013 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: All of the patients who underwent colorectal surgery during the study period were included. Patients were excluded for unknown transfer status or transfer from a chronic care facility. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline characteristics were compared by transfer status. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the impact of transfer on major complications and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 7259 operations (4.6%) were performed after transfer. Transferred patients had higher rates of complications (p < 0.0001) with significant differences in unplanned endotracheal reintubation, bleeding, organ-space surgical site infection, wound dehiscence, postoperative sepsis, cardiac arrest requiring cardiopulmonary resuscitation, deep venous thrombosis, and myocardial infarction. Transferred patients also had longer hospital stays (9 vs 6 days; p < 0.0001) and a higher risk of death (13.2% vs 2.6%; p < 0.0001). On multivariate analysis, transferred patients had higher mortality rates despite risk adjustment (OR = 1.13 (95% CI, 1.02-1.25); p = 0.019) and were also more likely to have serious complications (OR = 1.12 (95% CI, 1.06-1.19); p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: We were unable to analyze outcomes beyond 30 days, and we did not have information on preoperative evaluation or the reason for patient transfer. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-to-hospital transfer independently contributed to patient morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. The impact of hospital transfer must be considered when evaluating surgeon and hospital performance, because the increased risk of serious complications or death is not fully accounted for by traditional methods.

Contemporary management of rectal cancer.

The management of rectal cancer has undergone significant changes over the past 50 years, and this has been associated with major improvements in overall outcomes and quality of life. From standardization of total mesorectal excision to refinements in radiation delivery and shifting of chemoradiotherapy treatment to favor a neoadjuvant approach, as well as the development of targeted chemotherapeutics, these management strategies have continually aimed to achieve locoregional and systemic control while limiting adverse effects and enhance overall survival. This article highlights evolving aspects of rectal cancer therapy including improved staging modalities, total neoadjuvant therapy, the role of short-course and more selective radiotherapy strategies, as well as organ preservation. We also discuss the evolving role of minimally invasive surgery and comment on lateral pelvic lymph node dissection. Key message: Rectal cancer management is constantly evolving through refinements in radiation timing and delivery, modification of chemoradiotherapy treatment schedules, and increasing utilization of minimally invasive surgical techniques and organ preservation strategies. This manuscript aims to provide a synopsis of recent changes in the management of rectal cancer, highlighting contemporary modifications in neoadjuvant approaches and surgical management to enhance the knowledge of surgeons who care for this challenging population.

A population-based analysis on the incidence of metachronous colon cancer after endoscopic resection of advanced adenomas with high-grade dysplasia: does location matter?

BACKGROUND: Advanced adenomas (AAs) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) represent a risk factor for metachronous neoplasia, with guidelines recommending short-interval surveillance. Although the worse prognosis of proximal (vs distal) colon cancers (CCs) is established, there is paucity of evidence on the impact of laterality on the risk of subsequent neoplasia for these AAs. METHODS: Adults with HGD adenomas undergoing polypectomy were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database (2000-2019). Cumulative incidence of malignancy was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Fine-Gray models assessed the effect of patient and disease characteristics on CC incidence. RESULTS: Of 3199 patients, 26% had proximal AAs. A total of 65 cases of metachronous adenocarcinoma were identified after polypectomy of 35 proximal and 30 distal adenomas with HGD. The 10-year cumulative incidence of CC was 2.3%; when stratified by location, it was 4.8% for proximal vs 1.4% for distal adenomas. Proximal location was significantly associated with increased incidence of metachronous cancer (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% CI, 2.05-5.38). CONCLUSION: Proximal location of AAs with HGD was associated with >3-fold increased incidence of metachronous CC and shorter time to diagnosis. These data suggest laterality should be considered in the treatment and follow-up of these patients.

Percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess: is colon resection necessary?

BACKGROUND: Recurrent diverticulitis has been reported in up to 30% to 40% of patients who recover from an episode of colonic diverticular abscess, so elective interval resection is traditionally recommended. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the outcomes of patients who underwent percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess without subsequent operative intervention. DESIGN: This was an observational study. SETTINGS: This investigation was conducted at a tertiary care academic medical center and a single-hospital health system. PATIENTS: Patients treated for symptomatic colonic diverticular abscess from 2002 through 2007 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were complications, recurrence, and colectomy-free survival. RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen patients underwent percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscesses. Thirty-two patients (15%) did not undergo subsequent colonic resection. Abscess location was pelvic (n = 9) and paracolic (n = 23), the mean abscess size was 4.2 cm, and the median duration of percutaneous drainage was 20 days. The comorbidities of this group of patients included severe cardiac disease (n = 16), immunodeficiency (n = 7), and severe pulmonary disease (n = 6). Freedom from recurrence at 7.4 years was 0.58 (95% CI 0.42-0.73). All recurrences were managed nonoperatively. Recurrence was significantly associated with an abscess size larger than 5 cm. Colectomy-free survival at 7.4 years was 0.17 (95% CI 0.13-0.21). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective, nonexperimental design and short follow-up. CONCLUSION: In selected patients, observation after percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess appears to be a safe and low-risk management option.