A colorectal straight-to-test cancer pathway with general-practitioner-guided triage improves attainment of the 28-day diagnosis target and increases outpatient clinic capacity.

AIM: This study investigates whether a straight-to-test (STT) colorectal cancer pathway improves attainment of the National Health Service (NHS) England 28-day Faster Diagnosis Standard and the effect of the pathway on reducing face-to-face outpatient clinic appointments. Patient satisfaction and the safety of a novel general practitioner (GP) led patient triage system regarding suitability for colonoscopy are also evaluated. METHODS: This is an observational study of all patients managed via an STT colorectal cancer pathway between 1 September 2019 and 19 March 2020. Comparison is made with all patients referred on the suspected colorectal cancer pathway prior to implementation of the STT pathway from 1 January 2019 to 30 July 2019. Patient satisfaction with the STT pathway was assessed with a telephone-based questionnaire. RESULTS: Attainment of the 28-day diagnosis target for all suspected colorectal cancer referrals improved following the establishment of the STT pathway (88% vs. 82%, P < 0.0001). From a potential total of 548 outpatient colorectal clinic appointments for patients on the STT pathway, 504 (92%) were avoided. In those eligible for the STT pathway, GP assessment of patients suitable for colonoscopy agreed with that of the colorectal department in 93% of cases. Of the 50 patients who undertook the satisfaction survey, 86% were satisfied or very satisfied with the pathway. No patient suffered adverse events as a result of their STT investigations. CONCLUSION: An STT pathway for suspected colorectal cancer referrals with novel GP-led patient triage safely streamlines patients through the suspected colorectal cancer diagnostic pathway and significantly reduces requirement for face-to-face outpatient clinic attendance. This is achieved with high patient satisfaction.

An Evaluation of the Evidence Guiding Adult Midline Ventral Hernia Repair.

Purpose: Several guidelines have been published in recent years to guide the clinician in ventral hernia repair. This review distils this advice, critically assesses their evidence base, and proposes avenues for future study. Methods: A PUBMED search identified four guidelines addressing midline ventral hernia repair published by major surgical societies between 2016 and 2020. The studies used to inform the advice have been critically appraised, including 20 systematic reviews/meta-analyses, 10 randomized controlled trials, 32 cohort studies, and 14 case series. Results: Despite a lack of randomized controlled trials, case heterogeneity, and variation in outcome reporting, key themes have emerged. Preoperative computed tomography scan assesses defect size, loss of domain, and the likely need for component separation. Prehabilitation, frailty assessment, and risk stratification are beneficial in complex cases. Minimally invasive component separation techniques, Botox injection, and progressive pneumoperitoneum represent novel techniques to promote closure of large fascial defects. Rives-Stoppa sublay mesh repair has become the "gold" standard for open and minimally invasive repairs. Laparoscopic repair promotes early return to functional status. The enhanced-view totally extraperitoneal approach facilitates laparoscopic sublay mesh placement, avoiding mesh contact with viscera. Robotic techniques continue to evolve, although the evidence at present remains immature. Synthetic mesh is recommended for use in clean and clean-contaminated cases. However, optimism regarding the use of biologic and biosynthetic meshes in the contaminated setting has waned. Conclusions: Surgical techniques in ventral hernia repair have advanced in recent years. High-quality data has struggled to keep pace; rigorous clinical trials are required to support the surgical innovation.

Evidence-Based Approach to the Surgical Management of Acute Pancreatitis.

Background Acute pancreatitis is a significant challenge to health services. Remarkable progress has been made in the last decade in optimizing its management. Methods This review is a comprehensive assessment of 7 guidelines employed in current clinical practice with an appraisal of the underlying evidence, including 15 meta-analyses/systematic reviews, 16 randomized controlled trials, and 31 cohort studies. Results Key tenets of early management of acute pancreatitis include severity stratification based on the degree of organ failure and early goal-directed fluid resuscitation. Rigorous determination of etiology reduces the risk of recurrence. Early enteral nutrition and consideration of epidural analgesia have been pioneered in recent years with promising results. Indications for invasive intervention are becoming increasingly refined. The definitive indications for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in acute pancreatitis are associated with cholangitis and common bile duct obstruction. The role of open surgical necrosectomy has diminished with the development of a minimally invasive step-up necrosectomy protocol. Increasing use of endoscopic ultrasound-guided intervention in the management of pancreatic necrosis has helped reduce pancreatic fistula rates and hospital stay. Conclusion The optimal approach to surgical management of complicated pancreatitis depends on patient physiology and disease anatomy, in addition to the available resources and expertise. This is best achieved with a multidisciplinary approach. This review provides a distillation of the recommendations of clinical guidelines and critical discussion of the evidence that informs them and presents an algorithmic approach to key areas of patient management.

Open Appendicectomy under Spinal Anesthesia-A Valuable Alternative during COVID-19.

Introduction Concerns relating to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and general anesthesia (GA) prompted our department to consider that open appendicectomy under spinal anesthesia (SA) avoids aerosolization from intubation and laparoscopy. While common in developing nations, it is unusual in the United Kingdom. We present the first United Kingdom case series and discuss its potential role during and after this pandemic. Methods We prospectively studied patients with appendicitis at a British district general hospital who were unsuitable for conservative management and consequently underwent open appendicectomy under SA. We also reviewed patient satisfaction after 30 days. This ran for 5 weeks from March 25th, 2020 until the surgical department reverted to the laparoscopic appendicectomy as the standard of care. Main outcomes were 30-day complication rates and patient satisfaction. Results None of the included seven patients were COVID positive. The majority (four-sevenths) had complicated appendicitis. There were no major adverse (Clavien-Dindo grade III to V) postoperative events. Two patients suffered minor postoperative complications. Two experienced intraoperative pain. Mean operative time was 44 minutes. Median length of stay and return to activity was 1 and 14 days, respectively. Although four stated preference in hindsight for GA, the majority (five-sevenths) were satisfied with the operative experience under SA. Discussion Although contraindications, risk of pain, and specific complications may be limiting, our series demonstrates open appendicectomy under SA to be safe and feasible in the United Kingdom. The technique could be a valuable contingency for COVID-suspected cases and patients with high-risk respiratory disease.

A local experience of non-operative management for an appendicitis cohort during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: During the first United Kingdom COVID-19 wave, the Royal Colleges of Surgeons initially recommended conservative management with antibiotics instead of surgery for appendicitis. This study compared local outcomes of appendicitis during this period with a pre-COVID-19 cohort. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in a district general hospital. All episodes of appendicitis were prospectively studied from 25th March 2020 until 26th May 2020 and compared with a retrospective pre-COVID cohort from 27th November 2019 until 29th January 2020. Primary outcome was 30-day treatment failure of simple appendicitis for conservatively managed cases during COVID-19 compared to surgically managed cases pre-pandemic. Treatment failure was defined as any unplanned radiological or surgical intervention. RESULTS: Over nine weeks, there were 39 cases of appendicitis during COVID-19 and 50 cases pre-COVID-19. Twenty-six and 50 cases underwent appendicectomy during and pre-COVID-19 respectively. There was no difference in 30-day postoperative complication rates and nor were there any peri-operative COVID-19 infections.Twelve cases of simple appendicitis underwent conservative management during COVID-19 and were compared with 23 operatively managed simple cases pre-pandemic. There was a higher failure rate in the conservative versus operative group (33.3 vs 0% OR = 24.88, 95% CI 1.21 to 512.9, p=0.0095). Length of stay was similar (1.5 vs 2.0 p=0.576). DISCUSSION: Locally, conservative management was more likely to fail than initial appendicectomy. We suggest that surgery should remain first line for appendicitis, with conservative management reserved for those with suspected or proven COVID-19 infection.

Management of acute diverticulitis.

Acute diverticulitis is a major health-care concern. The optimal management of this common condition has been critically examined in recent years leading to a number of paradigm changes. In many areas, the debate continues. Acute uncomplicated diverticulitis may be safely managed without antibiotics. A number of randomized controlled trials have examined the role of laparoscopic lavage vs resection for purulent peritonitis. In cases where resection is indicated the traditional Hartmann's procedure is being trialled against resection with primary anastomosis. In the follow up of an acute uncomplicated episode, the value of colonoscopy is being questioned but remains in current guidelines. In the elective setting, more recent studies have led to a trend away from resection to prevent complications but towards resection to improve quality of life. This article presents an overview of the current guidance, areas of controversy and the associated evidence base.