Standard outcome indicators after colon cancer resection. Creation of a nomogram for autoevaluation. / Resultados quirúrgicos estándar tras resección oncológica de colon. Creación de un nomograma para la autoevaluación.

INTRODUCTION: Lately there has been an increasing interest in identifying quality standards in different pathologies, among them colon cancer due to its great prevalence. The main goal of this study is to define the quality standards of colon cancer surgery based on a large prospective national study dataset. METHODS: Data from the prospective national study ANACO were used. This study included a consecutive series of patients operated on for colon cancer in 52 Spanish hospitals (2011-2012). Centers with less than 30 patients were excluded. The present analysis finally included 42 centers (2975 patients). Based on the results obtained in 4main indicators from each hospital (anastomotic leak, lymph-nodes found in the specimen, mortality and length of stay), a nomogram that allows the evaluation of the performance of each center was designed. Standard results for further 5 intraoperative and 5 postoperative quality indicators were also reported. RESULTS: Median of anastomotic leak and mortality rate was 8.5% (25th-75th percentiles 6.1%-12.4%) and 2.5% (25th-75th percentiles 0.6%-4.7%), respectively. Median number of nodes found in the surgical specimen was 15,1 (25th-75th percentiles 18-14 nodes). Median length of postoperative stay was 7.7 days (25th-75th percentiles 6.9-9.2 days). Based on these data, a nomogram for hospital audit was created. CONCLUSIONS: Standard surgical results after colon cancer surgery were defined, creating a tool for auto-evaluation and allowing each center to identify areas for improvement in the surgical treatment of colon cancer.

Prospective, randomized comparative study between single-port laparoscopic appendectomy and conventional laparoscopic appendectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Laparoscopic appendectomy is probably the technique of choice in acute appendicitis. Single port laparoscopic surgery (SILS) has been proposed as an alternative technique. The objective of this study is to compare the safety and efficacy of SILS against conventional laparoscopic appendectomy (LA). MATERIAL AND METHODS: From January 2011 to September 2012, 120 patients with acute appendicitis were prospectively randomized; 60 for SILS and 60 for LA. Patients between 15 to 65 years were selected, with onset of symptoms less than 48h. We compared BMI, surgery time, start of oral intake, hospital stay, postoperative pain, pathology and costs. RESULTS: The median age, BMI, sex and time of onset of symptoms to diagnosis were similar. There were no statistically significant differences in the operative time, start of oral intake or hospital stay. There was a significant difference in postoperative pain being higher in SILS (4±1.3) than in LA (3.3±0.5) with a P=.004. Flemonous appendicitis predominated in both groups in a similar percentage. A total of 3 cases with intra-abdominal abscess (SILS 2, LA 1) required readmission and resolved spontaneously with intravenous antibiotic treatment. One case of SILS required assistance by a 5mm trocar in the RLC for drainage placement. The cost was higher in SILS due the single port device. CONCLUSION: SILS appendectomy is safe, effective and has similar results to LA in selected patients, and although the cost is greater, the long term results will determine the future of this technique.

"Optimal recovery" after colon cancer surgery in the elderly, a comparative cohort study: Conventional care vs. enhanced recovery vs. prehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: Colon cancer in elderly patients is an increasing problem due to its prevalence and progressive aging population. Prehabilitation has experienced a great grown in this field. Whether it is the best standard of care for these patients has not been elucidated yet. METHODS: A retrospective comparative cohort study of three different standards of care for elderly colon cancer patients (>65 years) was conducted. A four-weeks trimodal prehabilitation program (PP), enhanced recovery program (ERP) and conventional care (CC) were compared. Global complications, major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3), reinterventions, mortality, readmission and length of stay were measured. Optimal recovery, defined as postoperative course without major complications, no mortality, hospital discharge before the fifth postoperative day and without readmission, was the primary outcome measure. The influence of standard of care in optimal recovery and postoperative outcomes was assessed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were included, 51 in each group. Mean age was 77.9 years. ASA Score distribution was different between groups (ASA III-IV: CC 56.9%, ERP 25.5%, PP 58.9%; p = 0.014). Optimal recovery rate was 55.6% (PP 54.9%, ERP 66.7%, CC 45.1%; p = 0.09). No differences were found in major complications (p = 0.2) nor reinterventions (p = 0.7). Uneventful recovery favors ERP and PP groups (p = 0.046 and p = 0.049 respectively). CONCLUSIONS: PP and ERP are safe and effective for older colon cancer patients. Fewer overall complications and readmissions happened in ERP and PP patients. Major complications were independent of the standard of care used.

Anal fistula plug is a valid alternative option for the treatment of complex anal fistula in the long term.

OBJECTIVE: This prospective, two-centre study was designed to evaluate long-term outcomes when using a collagen plug to treat cryptoglandular anal fistulae. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Over 3 years, 60 consecutive patients with cryptoglandular fistulae were treated using an anal fistula plug by experienced surgeons. Preoperative, postoperative and follow-up data were collected in a dedicated database. Success was defined as the closure of all fistula openings and the absence of discharge. Faecal incontinence scores were administered at baseline and at 6 months follow-up. RESULTS: Eleven patients had multiple fistula tracts. All fistulae treated in this series were classified as complex. Seventeen fistulae were anterior tracts in females, and the remaining tracts were trans-sphincteric in nature. Thirty-eight tracts were recurrent. Mean operative time was 26 ± 10 min. No major complications, active sepsis or mortality were observed. Success rate with a mean follow-up of 13 months was 60% of patients and 70% of tracts. Mean time for recurrence was 5.7 months. Two recurrent patients were successfully treated with a redo plug procedure, and five were successfully closed with a post-plug fistulotomy, leading to a global 72% success rate without continence impairment. Of the patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months (mean, 18.5 months; range, 6-34 months), 29 in 32 (90.6%) were healed at final evaluation. In these patients, the mean preoperative CCF incontinence score was 0.73. This was reduced to 0.14 at 6-month follow-up. The mean reduction of CCF incontinence score was -0.6 (95% CI, 1.3 to -0.1; p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Fistula tract treatment with the anal fistula plug is a safe and viable surgical option that should be offered to complex fistula patients. The reasons and risk factors for recurrence remain to be explored.