2017 WSES guidelines on colon and rectal cancer emergencies: obstruction and perforation

Colorectal Oncologic Emergencies: Recognition, Management, and Outcomes

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequent type of malignancy in the United States, and the age at diagnosis is decreasing. Although the goal of screening is focused on prevention and early detection, a subset of patients inevitably presents as oncologic emergencies. Approximately 15% of patients with colorectal cancer will present as surgical emergencies, with the majority being due to either colonic perforation or obstruction. Patients presenting with colorectal emergencies are a challenging cohort, as they often present at an advanced stage with an increase in T stage, lymphovascular invasion, and metachronous liver disease.

Predictive factors of surgery in metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Current management of metastatic colorectal cancer is based on neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Few studies have reported on surgery procedures in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The objective of this study was to describe our institutional experience with emergency surgery performed in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer during chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study including adult patients of ≤80 years with a metastatic colorectal cancer between 2017 and 2020 and undergoing surgery during chemotherapy. Statistical analyses were based on Kaplan-Meier's curve and Cox proportional hazard model. The surgery statistical risk during chemotherapy was studied through all tumor and patient's characteristics. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to identify predictive factors of emergency surgery in these patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-two cases were identified and 60% patients undergone an emergency surgery. By Kaplan-Meier's analyses, intestinal surgery was much more frequent and early in patients who have severe stenosis (either blocking or only permeable using a gastroscope) at the time of diagnosis. Patients with severe malignant stenosis presented a 6.28 time higher surgery risk (p < .0001). The median time between admission and surgery was 54 days in patients with severe stenosis who were operated.

CONCLUSION

The degree of colorectal tumor stenosis measured by endoscopy was a risk factor for emergency surgery in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In this group of patients presenting low survival outcomes, further studies are needed to define the place of preventive surgery, avoiding emergency surgery and morbidity in such fragile patients.

Intestinal perforation due to colorectal cancer during pregnancy: case report and literature review

Colorectal cancer (CRC) in pregnancy is sporadic. We reported a case of a woman at 23 + 4 weeks of gestation who presented with abdominal pain. The patient underwent an ultrasound and MRI, during which a colonic mass was noted. Considering a probable incomplete intestinal obstruction, a colonoscopy, biopsy, and colonic stenting were performed by a multidisciplinary team. However, sudden hyperthermia and CT demonstrated intestinal perforation, and an emergency caesarean section and colostomy were conducted. The histological analysis confirmed moderately high-grade adenocarcinoma.

Acute intestinal obstruction due to meckel's diverticulum: A case report and literature review

Introduction

and Importance: Meckel's diverticulum is a rare congenital condition often detected incidentally. Meckel's diverticulum, a rare disease, may result in acute intestinal obstruction and is frequently misdiagnosed. This study aims to report a case of acute intestinal obstruction due to Meckel's diverticulum.

Case presentation

A 61-year-old Javanese man was admitted to the emergency room with a history of constipation, nausea, vomiting, and abdominal pain. Physical examination showed abdomen distention, tenderness in the lower quadrant, and hyperactive bowel sound. Rectal examination found that the rectal ampulla was collapsed. A plain abdominal Radiograph showed small bowel dilatation and air-fluid levels. The patient was diagnosed with small bowel obstruction due to suspected left-sided colon cancer and taken up for exploratory laparotomy.

Clinical discussion

On exploration, Meckel's diverticulum measuring 3.5 cm in length and with a 2 cm base was found about 70 cm proximal to the Bauhin valve; the thin part formed a band that entangled the small bowel. Ileo-ileal resection anastomosis was performed.

Clinical discussion

Meckel's diverticulum is an intestinal pouch caused by incomplete obliteration of the vitelline duct during gestation. This condition affects 2 % of the population and is within 2 feet of the Bauhin valve. The mesodiverticular band was found to be the source of the bowel obstruction. Surgical resection is required for complicated diverticulum.

Conclusion

Meckel's diverticulum can be difficult to diagnose and require a higher level of suspicion. Although Meckel's diverticulum is uncommon in adults, it should be considered a cause of small bowel obstruction.

The health-related quality of life of early-onset colorectal cancer patients: an Australian cross-sectional study

AIM

Early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) patients are more likely to have advanced disease and undergo more aggressive treatment modalities. However, current literature investigating the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of EOCRC patients is scarce. This study aimed to determine the HRQoL of an Australian cohort of EOCRC patients including a subset who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) or cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC).

METHOD

A cross-sectional study of EOCRC patients treated at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Australia was performed. Patients were divided into groups based on the time interval from their index operation: ≤2 years and >2 years. HRQoL was evaluated using the SF-36v2 questionnaire.

RESULTS

A total of 50 patients were included. For patients ≤2 years from surgery, the median physical component summary (PCS) and mental health component summary (MCS) scores were 53.3 (36.4-58.9) and 47.3 (37.5-55.7). In the >2 years group, the median PCS and MCS scores were 50.6 (43.3-57.7) and 50.2 (39.04-56.2), respectively. Stage I (vs. stage II) disease and emergency (vs. elective) surgery conferred poorer PCS scores in patients ≤2 years from surgery. No other variables impacted PCS or MCS scores in EOCRC patients in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

HRQoL of EOCRC patients was equivocal to the Australian population. Having an earlier stage of diagnosis and emergency index operation was associated with poorer levels of physical functioning in patients ≤2 years from surgery. However, because of the limitations of this study, these findings require validation in future large-scale prospective research.

A case of acute appendicitis caused by obstruction due to caecal cancer

Acute appendicitis supposedly results from appendix obstruction caused by various conditions, including caecal cancer. Here, we report an adenocarcinoma found in the specimen of a 65-year-old man diagnosed with acute appendicitis. The adenocarcinoma was detected in the appendix stump after emergency laparoscopic appendectomy. The patient was diagnosed with caecal cancer based on post-operative lower endoscopy findings, and an additional laparoscopic right hemicolectomy was performed. Acute appendicitis can occur at any age and may require emergency surgery. It is a benign disease that can be cured entirely by appendectomy in most cases but may result from an underlying malignant disease in some cases, especially in patients >40 years of age. Thus, clinicians should consider the possibility of a malignancy while diagnosing and treating acute appendicitis.

Efficacy and Safety Analysis of Emergency Endoscopic Self-Expanding Metal Stent Placement Without Fluoroscopic Assistance for Right-Sided Colonic Cancer Obstruction

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, surgical treatment is recommended for right-sided colonic cancer obstruction (RCCO); however, the literature comparing surgical or non-surgical procedures is lacking.

METHODS

Patients included in this study were divided into two groups: one group received elective surgery after self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) placement, i.e., the bridge to surgery (BTS) group, and one group received emergency surgery (ES).

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were included in the BTS group and 60 patients underwent ES. The technical and clinical success rates for SEMS placement were 100% and 88.6%, respectively, while the short-term complication rates were 51.4% and 33.3% for the BTS and ES groups, respectively (p = 0.082). Overall, 2.9% and 3.3% of postoperative deaths occurred in the BTS and ES groups (p = 1.000). The 1-year overall survival (OS) rates were 91.4% and 88.3% (p = 0.840), 3-year OS rates were 85.7% and 81.7% (p = 0.860), and 5-year OS rates were 82.9% and 76.7% (p = 0.620) in the BTS and ES groups, respectively. No tumor recurrence was found in the BTS group but seven recurrences were found in the ES group (11.7%) [p = 0.091]. Laparoscopic surgery was chosen by 42.9% of patients in the BTS group and 26.7% of patients in the ES group (p = 0.104); however, the length of hospital stay (p = 0.001) was longer in the BTS group.

CONCLUSIONS

In the two groups, no differences were found in terms of postoperative complications and mortality as well as OS. The BTS group preferred to perform laparoscopic surgery and the technical success rate of stenting was high, therefore SEMS for RCCO was considered safe and feasible.

Goodbye Hartmann trial: a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study on the current use of a surgical procedure developed a century ago

BACKGROUND

Literature suggests colonic resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) instead of Hartmann's procedure (HP) for the treatment of left-sided colonic emergencies. We aim to evaluate the surgical options globally used to treat patients with acute left-sided colonic emergencies and the factors that leading to the choice of treatment, comparing HP and RPA.

METHODS

This is a prospective, international, multicenter, observational study registered on ClinicalTrials.gov. A total 1215 patients with left-sided colonic emergencies who required surgery were included from 204 centers during the period of March 1, 2020, to May 31, 2020. with a 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

564 patients (43.1%) were females. The mean age was 65.9 ± 15.6 years. HP was performed in 697 (57.3%) patients and RPA in 384 (31.6%) cases. Complicated acute diverticulitis was the most common cause of left-sided colonic emergencies (40.2%), followed by colorectal malignancy (36.6%). Severe complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were higher in the HP group (P < 0.001). 30-day mortality was higher in HP patients (13.7%), especially in case of bowel perforation and diffused peritonitis. 1-year follow-up showed no differences on ostomy reversal rate between HP and RPA. (P = 0.127). A backward likelihood logistic regression model showed that RPA was preferred in younger patients, having low ASA score (≤ 3), in case of large bowel obstruction, absence of colonic ischemia, longer time from admission to surgery, operating early at the day working hours, by a surgeon who performed more than 50 colorectal resections.

CONCLUSIONS

After 100 years since the first Hartmann's procedure, HP remains the most common treatment for left-sided colorectal emergencies. Treatment's choice depends on patient characteristics, the time of surgery and the experience of the surgeon. RPA should be considered as the gold standard for surgery, with HP being an exception.

CT prognostic signs of postoperative complications in emergency surgery for acute obstructive colonic cancer

PURPOSE

To identify CT prognostic signs of poor outcomes in acute obstructive colonic cancer (AOCC).

METHODS

Demographic, clinical, laboratory, radiological and surgical data of 65 consecutive patients with AOCC who underwent emergency surgery were analyzed. CT exams were reviewed to assess diameters of cecum, ascending, transverse, descending, and sigmoid proximal to the tumor; colon segments' CD/L1-VD ratios, continence of the ileocecal valve, small bowel overdistension, presence of small bowel feces sign and cecal pneumatosis. Post Operative complications (PO), according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Gender, age and location of the tumor were not predictive factors of complications. Among laboratory exams, CRP was the most important predictive value of PO (OR 8.23). A cecum distension ≥ 9 cm represented the critical diameter beyond which perforation and cecal necrosis were found at surgery. Cecal pneumatosis at CT was correlated with cecal necrosis at surgery in < 50% of patients. Pre-operative transverse colon CD/L1-VD ratio ≥ 1.43 and descending colon CD/L1-VD ratio ≥ 1.31 were associated with the development of PO (grade ≥ III-V). PO (grade ≥ III-V) occurred in 18/65 patients.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative complications in emergency surgery of AOCC were not related to the age, sex and tumor's location. Preoperative PCR values (≥ 2.17) predict the development of postoperative complications. CT resulted a valid diagnostic tool to identify patients at higher risk of complications: a CD/L1-VD ratios with cut-off values of 1.43 (transverse) and 1.31 (descending) predicted major complications (grade ≥ III-V) and a cecum distension ≥ 9 cm represented the critical diameter beyond which perforation occurred in > 84% of patients.

Management of obstructed colorectal carcinoma in an emergency setting: An update

Colorectal carcinoma is common, particularly on the left side. In 20% of patients, obstruction and ileus may be the first clinical manifestations of a carcinoma that has advanced (stage II, III or even IV). Diagnosis is based on clinical presentation, plain abdominal radiogram, computed tomography (CT), CT colonography and positron emission tomography/CT. The best management strategy in terms of short-term operative or interventional and long-term oncological outcomes remains unknown. For the most common left-sided obstruction, the first choice should be either emergency surgery or endoscopic decompression by self-expendable metal stents or tubes. The operative plan should be either one-stage or two-stage resection. One-stage resection with on-table bowel decompression and irrigation can be accompanied or not accompanied by proximal defunctioning stoma (colostomy or ileostomy). Primary anastomosis is more convenient but has increased risks of anastomotic leakage and morbidity. Two-stage resection (Hartmann's procedure) is safer and the most widely used despite temporally affecting quality of life. Damage control surgery in high-risk frail patients is less frequently performed since it can be successfully substituted with endoscopic stenting or tubing. For the less common right-sided obstruction, one-stage surgical resection is more beneficial than endoscopic decompression. The role of minimally invasive surgery (laparoscopic or robotic) is a subject of debate. Emergency laparoscopic-assisted management is advantageous to some extent but requires much expertise due to inherent difficulties in dissecting the distended colon and the risk of rupture and subsequent septic complications. The decompressing stent as a bridge to elective surgery more substantially decreases the risks of morbidity and mortality than emergency surgery for decompression and has equivalent medium-term overall survival and disease-free survival rates. Its combination with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiation may have a positive effect on long-term oncological outcomes. Management plans are crucial and must be individualized to better fit each case.

Stage IV Colorectal Cancer at Initial Presentation versus Progression during and after Treatment, Differences in Management: Management Differences for Initial Presentation versus Progression of Disease after Initial Treatment

Stage IV colorectal cancer is a prevalent disease and understanding the appropriate treatment options is important. Medical oncologic treatment remains the mainstay of treatment in cases where curative resection is not possible. Surgical intervention is indicated if the primary tumor and associated metastases are amenable to curative resection or if obstructive, bleeding, or perforative complications arise from the tumor. New endoscopic techniques can provide palliation and benefit for patients who cannot undergo surgery and may speed time to chemotherapy initiation. Recently, immunotherapy has shown promise at managing, controlling, and regressing advanced disease, in some cases converting it to curative with resection. For patients that progress while on treatment, continued medical therapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Further research into the benefits of asymptomatic primary tumor resection without curative intent needs to be performed. Colorectal cancer, and more specifically metastatic colorectal cancer, continues to have improved 1- and 5-year survival rates and likely will continue to do so over the coming months and years.

Robotic high anterior resection for rectal cancer with hand-sewn Gambee anastomosis after metal stent placement in a colorectal malignant stricture: A case report

INTRODUCTION

Robot-assisted surgery is increasingly deployed in colorectal surgery, and decompression surgery using a stent is considered a standard treatment for malignant stenosis of the large intestine. Surgery after stent placement is also frequently performed. However, the anastomosis method remains controversial.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

A 75-year-old woman visited our hospital's internal medicine department with chief complaints of bloody stool and constipation for the past year and colonoscopy was scheduled. After taking laxatives to prepare for treatment, abdominal pain was noticed and an emergency request was made. A diagnosis of colorectal malignant stricture and rectosigmoid junction cancer was made and a stent was placed during emergency colonoscopy. After intestinal decompression, a diagnosis of rectosigmoid junction cancer (UICC 8th; T3N0M0 Stage IIa) was rendered and robotic-assisted high anterior resection of the rectum and lymph node D3 dissection were performed. Reconstruction was performed using Gambee anastomosis outside the body cavity. The postoperative course was uneventful.

DISCUSSION

The double stapling technique is simple, but in this case, the obstructed intestinal tract was swollen. Meanwhile, Gambee anastomosis, which allows adjustment of tightness, was considered effective.

CONCLUSION

Gambee anastomosis is a valid option when robot-assisted rectal resection is performed after intestinal decompression with stent placement for malignant stricture of the rectosigmoid junction. It is important to select a hand-sewn or mechanical anastomosis by considering the condition of the organ to be anastomosed and the site of the anastomosis.

Malignant Acute Colonic Obstruction: Multidisciplinary Approach for Endoscopic Management

Patients presenting with acute colonic obstruction are usually evaluated in the emergency department and multiple specialties are involved in the patients' management. Pre-treatment evaluation is essential in order to establish the correct endoscopic indication for stent implantation. Contrast-enhanced imaging could allow the exclusion of benign causes of colonic obstruction and evaluation of the length of malignant stricture. Endoscopic stenting is the gold standard of treatment for palliative indications whereas there are still concerns about its use as a bridge to surgery. Different meta-analyses showed that stenting as a bridge to surgery improves short-term surgical outcomes but has no role in improving long-term outcomes. Multidisciplinary evaluation is also essential in patients that may be started on or are currently receiving antiangiogenic agents because endoscopic stenting may increase the risk of perforation. Evidence in the literature is weak and based on retrospective data. Here we report on how to correctly evaluate a patient with acute colonic malignant obstruction in collaboration with other essential specialists including a radiologist, surgeon and oncologist, and how to optimize the technique of endoscopic stenting.

Laparoscopic versus Open Emergency Surgery for Right Colon Cancers

BACKGROUND

A laparoscopic approach to right colectomies for emergency right colon cancers is under investigation. This study compares perioperative and oncological long-term outcomes of right colon cancers undergoing laparoscopic or open emergency resections and identifies risk factors for survival.

METHODS

Patients were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database between 2009 and 2019. Demographics, clinicopathological features, recurrence, and survival were investigated. Cox regression analysis was performed for risk factor analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 202 right colectomies (114 open and 88 laparoscopic) were included. ASA III-IV was higher in the open group. The conversion rate was 14.8%. Laparoscopic surgery was significantly longer (156 vs. 203 min, p < 0.001); pTNM staging did not differ. Laparoscopy was associated with higher lymph node yield, and showed better resection clearance (R0, 78.9 vs. 87.5%, p = 0.049) and shorter postoperative stay (12.5 vs. 8.0 days, p < 0.001). Complication rates and grade were similar. The median length of follow-up was significantly higher in the laparoscopic group (20.5 vs. 33.5 months, p < 0.001). Recurrences were similar (34.2 vs. 36.4%). Open surgery had lower five-year overall survival (OS, 27.1 vs. 51.7%, p = 0.001). Five-year disease-free survival was similar (DFS, 55.8 vs. 56.5%). Surgical approach, pN, pM, retrieved LNs, R stage, and complication severity were risk factors for OS upon multivariate analysis. Pathological N stage and R stage were risk factors for DFS upon multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A laparoscopic approach to right colon cancers in an emergency setting is safe in terms of perioperative and long-term oncological outcomes. Randomized control trials are required to further investigate these results.

IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON THE EMERGENCY SURGICAL TREATMENT OF COLORECTAL CANCER

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the most common malignancy of the gastrointestinal tract and the third most common type of cancer worldwide. The COVID-19 pandemic, during the years 2020 and 2022, increased the difficulties in offering adequate early diagnosis and treatment to CRC patients worldwide. During this period, it was only possible to treat patients who evolved with complications, mainly intestinal obstruction and perforation.

AIMS

To assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the treatment of patients with CRC.

METHODS

A review of data from a total of 112 patients undergoing emergency surgical treatment due to complications of CRC was carried out. Of these, 78 patients underwent emergency surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic (2020/2021), and 34 were treated before the pandemic (2018/2019). Ethnic aspects, clinical symptoms, laboratory tests, histopathological variables, intra and postoperative complications, and 90-day postoperative follow-up were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Between the years 2018 and 2019, 79.4% (27/34) of patients had intestinal obstruction, while 20.6% (7/34) had intestinal perforation. During the period of the COVID-19 pandemic (2020/2021), 1.3% (1/78) of patients underwent surgery due to gastrointestinal bleeding, 6.4% (5/78) due to intestinal perforation, and 92.3% (72/78) due to intestinal obstruction. No statistically significant differences were recorded between the two groups in ethnic aspects, laboratory tests, type of complications, number of lymph nodes resected, compromised lymph nodes, TNM staging, pre or intraoperative complications, length of stay, readmission, or mortality rate. When considering postoperative tumor staging, among patients operated on in 2018/2019, 44.1% were classified as stage III and 38.2% as stage IV, while during the pandemic period, 28.2% presented stage III and 51.3% stage IV, also without a statistically significant difference between the two periods. Patients operated on during the pandemic had higher rates of vascular, lymphatic and perineural invasion.

CONCLUSIONS

The COVID-19 pandemic increased the rate of complications related to CRC when comparing patients treated before and during the pandemic. Furthermore, it had a negative impact on histopathological variables, causing worse oncological prognoses in patients undergoing emergency surgery.

Prognostic impact and survival outcomes of colon perforation in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Colon perforation caused by colorectal cancer (CRC) is a fatal condition requiring emergency intervention. For patients with metastatic lesions, surgeons face difficult decisions regarding whether to resect the primary and metastatic lesions. Moreover, there is currently no established treatment strategy for these patients. This study aimed to investigate the clinical practice and long-term outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC diagnosed with the onset of colon perforation.

METHODS

We performed a population-based multicenter cohort study. Consecutive patients diagnosed with stage IV CRC between 2008 and 2015 at all designated cancer hospitals in Fukushima Prefecture, Japan, were enrolled in this study. We evaluated the impact of colon perforation on the survival outcomes of patients with metastatic CRC. The main outcome was the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of perforation for overall survival (OS). Survival time and HRs were estimated using Kaplan‒Meier and Cox proportional regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 1258 patients were enrolled (perforation: n = 46; non-perforation: n = 1212). All but one of the patients with perforation underwent primary resection or colostomy and 25 cases were able to receive chemotherapy. The median OS for the perforation and non-perforation groups was 19.0 and 20.0 months, respectively (p = 0.96). Moreover, perforation was not an independent prognostic factor (aHR: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: 0.61-1.28).

CONCLUSIONS

In metastatic CRC, perforation is not necessarily a poor prognostic factor. Patients with perforation who undergo primary tumor resection or colostomy and prompt initiation of systemic chemotherapy might be expected to have a survival time similar to that of patients with non-perforated colon.

Colonic Resection, Stoma, or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer: the CROSCO-1 study protocol

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers worldwide. There are several causes of a mechanical left bowel obstructive but CRC accounts for approximately 50% of cases and in 10-30% of whom it is the presenting syndrome. In most cases, the left colon is involved. At present, the range of therapeutic alternatives in the management of obstructive left CRC in emergency conditions (primary resection vs. staged resection with applied self-expanding metallic stents) is broad, whereas internationally validated clinical recommendations in each condition are still lacking. This enormous variability affects the scientific evidence on both the immediate and long-term surgical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

CROSCO-1 (Colonic Resection, Stoma or Self-expanding Metal Stents for Obstructive Left Colon Cancer) study is a national, multi-center, prospective observational study intending to compare the clinical results of all these therapeutic regimens in a cohort of patients treated for obstructive left-sided CRC.

RESULTS

The primary aim of the CROSCO-1 study is the 1-year stoma rate of patients undergoing primary emergency surgical resection (Hartmann procedure or primary resection and anastomosis) compared with patients undergoing staged resection. Secondary outcomes are 30-day and 90-day major morbidity and mortality, 1-year quality of life and the timing of chemotherapy initiation in the two groups. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of a large prospective cohort study which will analyze what really happens in the common clinical practice of managing patients with obstructive left CRC will have the aim of understanding which is the best strategy in terms of surgical and oncological outcomes. Indeed, the CROSCO-1 study will analyze the early surgical outcomes for patients with obstructed left CRC. Future CROSCO studies will follow in which, instead, we will evaluate the long-term oncological outcomes of the two treatment strategies.

Why is early detection of colon cancer still not possible in 2023?

Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening is a fundamental tool in the prevention and early detection of one of the most prevalent and lethal cancers. Over the years, screening, particularly in those settings where it is well organized, has succeeded in reducing the incidence of colon and rectal cancer and improving the prognosis related to them. Despite considerable advancements in screening technologies and strategies, the effectiveness of CRC screening programs remains less than optimal. This paper examined the multifaceted reasons behind the persistent lack of effectiveness in CRC screening initiatives. Through a critical analysis of current methodologies, technological limitations, patient-related factors, and systemic challenges, we elucidated the complex interplay that hampers the successful reduction of CRC morbidity and mortality rates. While acknowledging the advancements that have improved aspects of screening, we emphasized the necessity of addressing the identified barriers comprehensively. This study aimed to raise awareness of how important CRC screening is in reducing costs for this disease. Screening and early diagnosis are not only important in improving the prognosis of patients with CRC but can lead to an important reduction in the cost of treating a disease that is often diagnosed at an advanced stage. Spending more sooner can mean saving money later.

A 37-Year-Old Schizophrenic Woman With Abdominal Pain

Introduction

Internal fistula across the posterior wall of stomach and the transverse colon caused by foreign bodies in the alimentary tract presents an extremely rare medical entity.

Presentation of case

We report an aschizophrenia female patient with onset of internal fistula across the posterior wall of stomach and the transverse colon triggered by swallowed magnetic metal beads. The patient was admitted to the emergency room of Northern Jiangsu People's Hospital because of acute right lower abdominal pain. Emergency routine abdominal CT scan revealed acute appendicitis and a set of foreign body in digestive tract.

Discussion

The foreign body in the stomach was removed by open surgery after tentative Endoscopic foreign body removal and laparoscopic appendectomy and exploration. In the process of exploring the gastric wall, it was found that one of magnet beads was embedded in the posterior wall of stomach and adhered to part of the transverse colon. After separation, it was found that an internal fistula was formed across the posterior wall of stomach and the transverse colon. As the patient ate only a small amount of food within 2 days, and the intestines were in good condition, we performed partial transverse colectomy, end-to-side anastomosis and gastric wall repair.

Conclusion

This case shows that for long-term foreign bodies in the digestive tract, we should be beware of the onset of gastrointestinal perforation. Moreover, perforation caused by the force acting on a blunt foreign body often results in atypical imaging findings, and the diagnosis of perforation cannot be clearly determined by imaging findings such as the presence of free gas downstream of the diaphragm. This poses new challenges for clear diagnosis and treatment.

Colonic stent as a bridge to surgery versus emergency rection for malignant left-sided colorectal obstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The role of self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) implantation as a bridge to surgery in malignant left-sided colorectal obstruction (MLCO) remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the safety of SEMS implantation versus emergency surgery (ER) in the treatment of MLCO.

METHODS

Four major literature databases (Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science) were searched to collect articles published before April 20, 2023. After determining random or fixed-effect models based on heterogeneity tests, odds ratios (RR) or standardized mean differences (SMD) with their respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Nineteen randomized controlled studies were included. The main outcomes included overall tumor recurrence rate, 30-day mortality rate, and overall incidence of complications. Secondary outcomes included mortality-related indicators, tumor recurrence-related indicators, surgery-related indicators, and other relevant indicators. The study found that there was no significant difference in the 30-day mortality rate between the SEMS group and the er group. However, the SEMS group had a lower overall incidence of complications (RR = 0.787, P = .004), lower incision infection rate (RR = 0.472, P = .003), shorter operation time (SMD = -0.591, P = .000), lower intraoperative blood loss (SMD = -1.046, P = .000), lower intraoperative transfusion rate (RR = 0.624, P = .021), lower permanent stoma rate (RR = 0.499, P = .000), lower overall stoma rate (RR = 0.520,P = .000), shorter hospital stay (SMD = -0.643, P = .014), and more lymph node dissections during surgery (SMD = 0.222, 95% CI: 0.021-0.423, P = .031), as well as a higher primary anastomosis rate (RR = 0.472, 95% CI: 0.286-0.7 77, P = .003), among other advantages. However, the SEMS group had a higher overall tumor recurrence rate (RR = 1.339, P = .048).

CONCLUSION

SEMS has significant advantages over er in relieving clinical symptoms and facilitating postoperative recovery in MLCO, but does not reduce the tumor recurrence rate. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy combined with SEMS may provide a new approach to the treatment of MLCO.

Cesena guidelines: WSES consensus statement on laparoscopic-first approach to general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopy is widely adopted across nearly all surgical subspecialties in the elective setting. Initially finding indication in minor abdominal emergencies, it has gradually become the standard approach in the majority of elective general surgery procedures. Despite many technological advances and increasing acceptance, the laparoscopic approach remains underutilized in emergency general surgery and in abdominal trauma. Emergency laparotomy continues to carry a high morbidity and mortality. In recent years, there has been a growing interest from emergency and trauma surgeons in adopting minimally invasive surgery approaches in the acute surgical setting. The present position paper, supported by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), aims to provide a review of the literature to reach a consensus on the indications and benefits of a laparoscopic-first approach in patients requiring emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies or abdominal trauma.

METHODS

This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of 54 experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on a position statement.

RESULTS

A total of 323 studies (systematic review and meta-analysis, randomized clinical trial, retrospective comparative cohort studies, case series) have been selected from an initial pool of 7409 studies. Evidence demonstrates several benefits of the laparoscopic approach in stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgical emergencies or abdominal trauma. The selection of a stable patient seems to be of paramount importance for a safe adoption of a laparoscopic approach. In hemodynamically stable patients, the laparoscopic approach was found to be safe, feasible and effective as a therapeutic tool or helpful to identify further management steps and needs, resulting in improved outcomes, regardless of conversion. Appropriate patient selection, surgeon experience and rigorous minimally invasive surgical training, remain crucial factors to increase the adoption of laparoscopy in emergency general surgery and abdominal trauma.

CONCLUSIONS

The WSES expert panel suggests laparoscopy as the first approach for stable patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for general surgery emergencies and abdominal trauma.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols following emergency intra-abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery improve postoperative outcomes as compared to conventional care.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, WoS, CENTRAL, and Pubmed were searched from inception to December 2022. Articles were eligible if they were randomized controlled trials (RCT) or non-randomized studies comparing ERAS protocols to conventional care for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery. The outcomes included postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity, prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), and readmission. An inverse variance random effects meta-analysis was performed. A risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane tools. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE.

RESULTS

After screening 1018 citations, 20 studies with 1615 patients in ERAS programs and 1933 patients receiving conventional care were included. There was a reduction in postoperative LOS in the ERAS group for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery (MD3.35, 95% CI 2.52-4.17, p < 0.00001) and lower GI surgery (MD2.80, 95% CI 2.62-2.99, p < 0.00001). There was a reduction in postoperative morbidity in the ERAS group for patients undergoing upper GI surgery (RR0.56, 95% CI 0.30-1.02, p = 0.06) and lower GI surgery (RR 0.66, 95%CI 0.52-0.85, p = 0.001). In the upper and lower GI subgroup, there were nonsignificant reductions in PPOI in the ERAS groups (RR0.59, 95% CI 0.30-1.17, p = 0.13; RR0.49, 95% CI 0.21-1.14, p = 0.10). There was a nonsignificant increased risk of readmission in the ERAS group (RR1.60, 95% CI 0.57-4.50, p = 0.50).

CONCLUSION

There is low-to-very-low certainty evidence supporting the use ERAS protocols for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery. The currently available data are limited by imprecision.

Impact of Preoperative Stoma Site Marking on Morbidity and Mortality in Patients with Colorectal Perforation: A Nationwide Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative stoma site marking reduces the incidence of complications from elective surgery. However, the impact of stoma site marking in emergency patients with colorectal perforation remains unclear. This study aimed to assess the impact of stoma site marking on morbidity and mortality in patients with colorectal perforation who underwent emergency surgery.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination inpatient database from April 1, 2012, to March 31, 2020. We identified patients who underwent emergency surgery for colorectal perforation. We compared outcomes between those with and without stoma site marking using propensity score matching to adjust for confounding factors. The primary outcome was the overall complication rate, and the secondary outcomes were stoma-related, surgical, and medical complications and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

We identified 21,153 patients (682 with stoma site marking and 20,471 without stoma site marking) and grouped them into 682 pairs using propensity score matching. The overall complication rates were 23.5% and 21.4% in the groups with and without stoma site marking, respectively (p = 0.40). Stoma site marking was not associated with a decrease in stoma-related, surgical, or medical complications. The 30-day mortality did not differ significantly between the groups with and without stoma site marking (7.9% vs. 8.4%, p = 0.843).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative stoma site marking was not associated with a reduction in morbidity and mortality in patients with colorectal perforation who underwent emergency surgery.

Fournier's Gangrene Secondary to Perforated Sigmoid Adenocarcinoma Within an Incarcerated Inguinal Hernia

Colon cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide. Approximately one-fifth of colon cancers will present emergently due to obstruction or perforation. Necrotizing soft tissue infection is a rare presentation of perforated colon cancer and represents a surgical emergency due to high mortality rate.  A man in his 80s presented with several days of scrotal pain and weakness. On physical exam he was found to have scrotal edema and erythema and bilateral inguinal hernias. Imaging revealed a large scrotal abscess and concern for necrotizing soft tissue infection. He was taken to the operating room for surgical debridement and exploration and was discovered to have perforated colon within an incarcerated inguinal hernia. He underwent exploratory laparotomy with sigmoid resection and end colostomy creation. Pathology returned demonstrating invasive sigmoid adenocarcinoma. Fournier's gangrene requires a high index of suspicion. It is a rapidly progressing infection associated with high mortality. Early initiation of antibiotics and surgical debridement are mainstays of treatment. When associated with perforated colonic malignancy, workup must include imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis as well as carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) level to complete staging. Fournier's gangrene secondary to perforated sigmoid adenocarcinoma is a unique presentation. Treatment first involves antibiotics and aggressive surgical debridement. Once the patient is stabilized, further oncologic workup should be completed to determine treatment course.

Minimally invasive colectomies can be performed with similar outcomes to open counterparts for colorectal cancer emergencies: a propensity score matching analysis utilizing ACS-NSQIP

PURPOSE

The safety and feasibility of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) in the setting of colorectal cancer emergencies have been debated. We sought to compare postoperative outcomes of MIS with open techniques in the setting of colorectal cancer emergencies from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database.

METHODS

We included patients undergoing colectomy for colorectal cancer emergency between 2012 and 2019 "2012-2019" from the ACS-NSQIP dataset. We compared short-term morbidity, mortality, short-term oncological outcomes, and secondary outcomes for MIS vs open colectomies using propensity score matching. We then evaluated the trends of MIS versus open colectomies using linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

We examined a total of 5544 patients (open n = 4070; MIS n = 1474) and included 1352 patients for our postoperative outcome analyses after propensity score matching 1:1 (open n = 676; MIS n = 676). Within the matched cohort, mortality was significantly higher in the open group (open 6.95% vs MIS 3.99%, OR 1.8, p = 0.023). Anastomotic leak rates were comparable between the  two groups (open 4.46% vs MIS 4.02%, OR 1.12, p = 0.787). Pulmonary complications were significantly higher after open surgery (open 10.06% vs MIS 4.73%, OR 2.25, p < 0.001). Rates of ileus were significantly higher amongst open patients (open 29.08% vs MIS 19.94%, p < 0.001). Patients stayed on average 1 day longer in the hospital after open surgery (p < 0.001). Rates of MIS for early tumors (N0 and T1/T2, n = 289) did not significantly change over 7 years (p = 0.597, rate = - 0.065%/year); however, utilization of MIS for late tumors (N1 or T3/T4, n = 4359) increased by 2.06% per year (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that MIS was associated with superior postoperative outcomes compared to open surgery without compromising oncological outcomes in patients undergoing emergency colectomy for colon cancer. Within the matched cohort, MIS was associated with lower rates of mortality, pulmonary complications, ileus, and shorter postoperative length of stay.

Surgical treatment and overall survival in patients with right-sided obstructing colon cancer-a nationwide retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare baseline characteristics, 90-day mortality and overall survival (OS) between patients with obstructing and non-obstructing right-sided colon cancer at a national level.

METHODS

All patients who underwent resection for right-sided colon cancer between January 2015 and December 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and stratified for obstruction. Primary outcome was 5-year OS after excluding 90-day mortality as assessed by the Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 525 patients (7%) with obstructing and 6891 patients (93%) with non-obstructing right-sided colon cancer were included. Patients with right-sided obstructing colon cancer (OCC) were older and had more often transverse tumour location, and the pathological T and N stage was more advanced than in those without obstruction (p < 0.001). The 90-day mortality in patients with right-sided OCC was higher compared to that in patients with non-obstructing colon cancer: 10% versus 3%, respectively (p < 0.001). The 5-year OS of those surviving 90 days postoperatively was 42% in patients with OCC versus 73% in patients with non-obstructing colon cancer, respectively (p < 0.001). Worse 5-year OS was found in patients with right-sided OCC for all stages. Obstruction was an independent risk factor for decreased OS in right-sided colon cancer (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.57-2.03).

CONCLUSION

In addition to increased risk of postoperative mortality, a stage-independent worse 5-year OS after excluding 90-day mortality was found in patients with right-sided OCC compared to patients without obstruction.

Colorectal cancer treatment guidelines and shared decision making quality and reporting assessment: Systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Physicians must share decisions and choose personalised treatments regarding patients´ beliefs and values.

OBJECTIVE

To analyse the quality of the recommendations about shared decision making (SDM) in colorectal (CRC) and anal cancer treatment clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and consensus statements (CSs).

METHODS

Guidelines were systematically reviewed following prospective registration (Prospero: CRD42021286146) without language restrictions searching 15 databases and 59 professional society websites from January 2010 to November 2021. A validated 31-item SDM quality assessment tool was employed to extract data in duplicate.

RESULTS

We identified 134 guidelines. Only 46/134 (34.3 %) mentioned SDM. Fifteen (11.1 %) made clear, precise and actionable recommendations, while 9/134 (6.7 %) indicated the strength of the SDM-related recommendations. CPGs underpinned by systematic reviews reported SDM more often than those based on consensus or reviews (35.9 % vs 32.0 %; p = 0.031). Guidelines that reported following quality tools (i.e., AGREE II) more commonly commented about SDM than when it was not reported (75.0 % vs 32.0 %; p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Most of the CRC and anal treatment guidelines did not mention SDM and it was superficial. Guidelines based on systematic reviews and those using quality tools demonstrated better reporting of SDM. Recommendations about SDM in these guidelines merit urgent improvement.

Self-expanding metal stents versus decompression tubes as a bridge to surgery for patients with obstruction caused by colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) and decompression tubes (DT) as a bridge-to-surgery (BTS) treatment may avoid emergency operations for patients with colorectal cancer-caused obstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the two approaches.

METHODS

We systematically retrieved literature from January 1, 2000, to May 30, 2023, from the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, SinoMed, Wanfang Data, Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or cohort studies of SEMS versus DT as BTS in colorectal cancer obstruction were selected. Risks of bias were assessed for RCTs and cohort studies using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool version 2 and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies of Interventions. Certainty of evidence was determined using the Graded Recommendation Assessment. Odds ratio (OR), mean difference (MD), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were used to analyze measurement data.

RESULTS

We included eight RCTs and eighteen cohort studies involving 2,061 patients (SEMS, 1,044; DT, 1,017). Pooled RCT and cohort data indicated the SEMS group had a significantly higher clinical success rate than the DT group (OR = 1.99, 95% CI 1.04, 3.81, P = 0.04), but no significant difference regarding technical success (OR = 1.29, 95% CI 0.56, 2.96, P = 0.55). SEMS had a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays (MD = - 4.47, 95% CI - 6.26, - 2.69, P < 0.00001), a lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain (OR = 0.16, 95% CI 0.05, 0.50, P = 0.002), intraoperative bleeding (MD = - 37.67, 95% CI - 62.73, - 12.60, P = 0.003), stoma creation (OR = 0.41, 95% CI 0.23, 0.73, P = 0.002) and long-term tumor recurrence rate than DT (OR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.22, 0.99, P = 0.05).

CONCLUSION

SEMS and DT are both safe as BTS to avoid emergency surgery for patients with colorectal cancer obstruction. SEMS is preferable because of higher clinical success rates, lower rates of operation-related abdominal pain, intraoperative bleeding, stoma creation, and long-term tumor recurrence, as well as a shorter postoperative length of hospital stays. Trial registration CRD42022365951 .

Safety of early Hartmann reversal during adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer: a pilot study

Introduction

Most patients undergoing the Hartmann procedure for complicated colorectal cancer require chemotherapy because of their advanced status. Stoma created during the procedure is typically closed after the completion of postoperative chemotherapy. However, stomas can induce medical or surgical complications and disturb quality of life. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of Hartmann's reversal during postoperative chemotherapy.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of electronic medical records. Between 2017 and 2021, 96 patients underwent Hartmann reversal for after colorectal cancer surgery. Among them, the number of patients who underwent Hartmann procedure with radical resection of complicated colorectal cancer and Hartmann reversal during adjuvant chemotherapy was 13. The clinical, surgical, and pathological characteristics of the patients were evaluated.

Results

Eight and five patients had obstructions and perforations, respectively. Two patients with synchronous liver metastases underwent simultaneous liver resection and reversal simultaneously. Five and eight patients received adjuvant chemotherapy with capecitabine and FOLFOX, respectively. The median interval between the Hartmann procedure and reversal was 3.31 months (2.69-5.59). The median operative time for Hartmann's reversal was 190 min (100-335). The median hospital stay was 10 days (7-21). Four patients (30.8%) developed postoperative complications, and the rate of 3 or higher grade according to the Clavien-Dindo classification within 90 days postoperatively was 0%. Except for 1 patient who refused continuation of chemotherapy, 12 patients completed the planned chemotherapy. Median total duration of adjuvant chemotherapy was 6.78 months (5.98-8.48). There was no mortality.

Conclusion

Early Hartmann reversal during adjuvant chemotherapy is tolerable and safe in carefully selected patients. In particular, it can be used as a therapeutic option for patients with complicated colorectal cancer with synchronous resectable metastases.

Postponing surgery to optimise patients with acute right-sided obstructing colon cancer - A pilot study

BACKGROUND

Right-sided obstructing colon cancer is most often treated with acute resection. Recent studies on right-sided obstructing colon cancer report higher mortality and morbidity rates than those in patients without obstruction. The aim of this study is to retrospectively analyse whether it is possible to optimise the health condition of patients with acute right-sided obstructing colon cancer, prior to surgery, and whether this improves postoperative outcomes.

METHOD

All consecutive patients with high suspicion of, or histologically proven, right-sided obstructing colon cancer, treated with curative intent between March 2013 and December 2019, were analysed retrospectively. Patients were divided into two groups: optimised group and non-optimised group. Pre-operative optimisation included additional nutrition, physiotherapy, and, if needed, bowel decompression.

RESULTS

In total, 54 patients were analysed in this study. Twenty-four patients received optimisation before elective surgery, and thirty patients received emergency surgery, without optimisation. Scheduled surgery was performed after a median of eight days (IQR 7-12). Postoperative complications were found in twelve (50%) patients in the optimised group, compared to twenty-three (77%) patients in the non-optimised group (p = 0.051). Major complications were diagnosed in three (13%) patients with optimisation, compared to ten (33%) patients without optimisation (p = 0.111). Postoperative in-hospital stay, 30-day mortality, as well as primary anastomosis were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

This pilot study suggests that pre-operative optimisation of patients with obstructing right sided colonic cancer may be feasible and safe but is associated with longer in-patient stay.

Colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients: preliminary result from the Web-based International Register of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (WIRES-T trial)

Association of advanced age, neoplastic disease and immunocompromission (IC) may lead to surgical emergencies. Few data exist about this topic. Present study reports the preliminary data from the WIRES-T trial about patients managed for colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients. The required data were taken from a prospective observational international register. The study was approved by the Ethical Committee with approval n. 17575; ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03643718. 839 patients were collected; 753 (80.7%) with mild-moderate IC and 86 (10.3%) with severe. Median age was 71.9 years and 73 years, respectively, in the two groups. The causes of mild-moderate IC were reported such malignancy (753-100%), diabetes (103-13.7%), malnutrition (26-3.5%) and uremia (1-0.1%), while severe IC causes were steroids treatment (14-16.3%); neutropenia (7-8.1%), malignancy on chemotherapy (71-82.6%). Preoperative risk classification were reported as follow: mild-moderate: ASA 1-14 (1.9%); ASA 2-202 (26.8%); ASA 3-341 (45.3%); ASA 4-84 (11.2%); ASA 5-7 (0.9%); severe group: ASA 1-1 patient (1.2%); ASA 2-16 patients (18.6%); ASA 3-41 patients (47.7%); ASA 4-19 patients (22.1%); ASA 5-3 patients (3.5%); lastly, ASA score was unavailable for 105 cases (13.9%) in mild-moderate group and in 6 cases (6.9%) in severe group. All the patients enrolled underwent urgent/emergency surgery Damage control approach with open abdomen was adopted in 18 patients. Mortality was 5.1% and 12.8%, respectively, in mild-moderate and severe groups. Long-term survival data: in mild-moderate disease-free survival (median, IQR) is 28 (10-91) and in severe IC, it is 21 (10-94). Overall survival (median, IQR) is 44 (18-99) and 26 (20-90) in mild-moderate and severe, respectively; the same is for post-progression survival (median, IQR) 29 (16-81) and 28, respectively. Univariate and multivariate analyses showed as the only factor influencing mortality in mild-moderate and severe IC is the ASA score. Colorectal neoplastic emergencies in immunocompromised patients are more frequent in elderly. Sigmoid and right colon are the most involved. Emergency surgery is at higher risk of complication and mortality; however, management in dedicated emergency surgery units is necessary to reduce disease burden and to optimize results by combining oncological and acute care principles. This approach may improve outcomes to obtain clinical advantages for patients like those observed in elective scenario. Lastly, damage control approach seems feasible and safe in selected patients.

The Association of Polish Surgeons (APS) clinical guidelines for the use of laparoscopy in the management of abdominal emergencies. Part II

Introduction

Over the past three decades, almost every type of abdominal surgery has been performed and refined using the laparoscopic technique. Surgeons are applying it for more procedures, which not so long ago were performed only in the classical way. The position of laparoscopic surgery is therefore well established, and in many operations it is currently the recommended and dominant method.

Aim

The aim of the preparation of these guidelines was to concisely summarize the current knowledge on laparoscopy in acute abdominal diseases for the purposes of the continuous training of surgeons and to create a reference for opinions.

Material and methods

The development of these recommendations is based on a review of the available literature from the PubMed, Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases from 1985 to 2022, with particular emphasis on systematic reviews and clinical recommendations of recognized scientific societies. The recommendations were formulated in a directive form and evaluated by a group of experts using the Delphi method.

Results and conclusions

There are 63 recommendations divided into 12 sections: diagnostic laparoscopy, perforated ulcer, acute pancreatitis, incarcerated hernia, acute cholecystitis, acute appendicitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, abdominal trauma, bowel obstruction, diverticulitis, laparoscopy in pregnancy, and postoperative complications requiring emergency surgery. Each recommendation was supported by scientific evidence and supplemented with expert comments. The guidelines were created on the initiative of the Videosurgery Chapter of the Association of Polish Surgeons and are recommended by the national consultant in the field of general surgery. The second part of the guidelines covers sections 6 to12 and the following challenges for surgical practice: acute appendicitis, acute mesenteric ischemia, abdominal injuries, bowel obstruction, diverticulitis, laparoscopy in pregnancy and postoperative complications requiring a reoperation.

The dynamics of the lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) level in assessing the risk of adverse outcomes in operated colorectal cancer patients

BACKGROUND

The main aim of this study is to analyze changes in the lipopolysaccharide-binding protein (LBP) level in blood serum over time and assess it as a potential risk factor for the development of SIRS, infectious and inflammatory complications, organ dysfunction and mortality in patients operated on colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

90 CRC patients were divided into 2 groups: Group 1-50 patients operated on for CRC without acute bowel obstruction (ABO); Group 2-40 patients operated on for CRC with ABO. To determine LBP by ELISA method venous blood was taken 1 h before surgery and 72 h after it (3rd day).

RESULTS

LBP level on the 3rd day after surgery was lower in CRC patients with SIRS, postoperative complications, organ dysfunction and in dead patients. With an LBP value on the 3rd day after surgery being at ≤821.95 ng/mL, the risk of SIRS occurrence is 3.5 times higher, that of the postoperative complications is 5.2 times higher and death is 12.9 times higher than with its higher level (OR 3.5, CI 1.46-8.4; OR 5.2, CI 1.80-15.12; OR 12.9, CI 1.54-108.21, respectively). If the LBP value on the 3rd day after surgery is ≤ 700.15 ng/mL, the risk of organ dysfunctions is 13.5 times higher than with its higher level (OR 13.5, CI 3.536-51.54).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated that in the patients with CRC, the LBP can be used as a predictive criterion for the development of SIRS, postoperative infectious and inflammatory complications, organ dysfunction, and mortality.

Incidence and risk factors of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

The literature reports a varying occurrence (3-33%) of blowout of the rectal remnant after Hartmann's procedure, and there is a lack of multivariate analyses on potential risk factors for blowout following Hartmann's procedure. We aimed to estimate the incidence of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure and to identify potential risk factors for blowout through multivariate analysis.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, a Danish primary and tertiary hospital. Patients who underwent primary surgery with Hartmann's procedure irrespective of surgical setting and indications between September 2016 and August 2021 were included. Blowout was defined as a defective closure line of the rectal stump or a pelvic abscess.

RESULTS

A total of 178 patients were included, and blowout occurred in 30 patients (16.9%) within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure. Multivariate analysis showed increased risk of blowout among patients with Hinchey IV diverticulitis (relative risk 6.32 (95% CI 4.09-9.75)), previous radiotherapy (relative risk 3.35 (95% CI 1.67-6.74)), and alcohol overconsumption (relative risk 1.69 (95% CI 1.05-2.72)). Intraoperative insertion of a Foley catheter in the rectal remnant significantly reduced the risk of blowout within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure (relative risk 0.18 (95% CI 0.05-0.65)).

CONCLUSION

Blowout remains a severe and common complication within 90 days after a primary Hartmann's procedure. Hinchey IV diverticulitis, pelvic radiotherapy, and alcohol overconsumption are risk factors. An intraoperatively inserted rectal Foley catheter is a protective factor and can be considered used in all patients undergoing Hartmann's procedure.

Self-expandable metallic stent as bridge to surgery vs. emergency resection in obstructive right-sided colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Emergency resection is common for malignant right-sided obstructive colon cancer. As there is evidence showing a potential benefit of self-expandable metal stents as a bridge to surgery, a new debate has been initiated.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare self-expandable metal stents with emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer.

DATA SOURCE

A systematic search was conducted accessing Medline/PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies reporting either emergency surgery or stent placement in right-sided obstructive colon cancer were included.

INTERVENTION

Stent or emergency resection in right-sided obstructive colon cancer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Morbidity rate, mortality rate, stoma rate, laparoscopic resection rate, anastomotic insufficiency rate, success rate of stent.

RESULTS

A total of 6343 patients from 16 publications were analyzed. The stent success rate was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.87 to 0.95) with perforation of 0.03 (95% CI, 0.01 to 0.06). Emergency resection was performed laparoscopically at a rate of 0.15 (95% CI, 0.09 to 0.24). Primary anastomosis rate in emergency resection was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.91 to 0.97) with an anastomotic insufficiency rate of 0.07 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.11). The mortality rate after emergency resection was 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.09). Primary anastomosis and anastomotic insufficiency rate were similar between the two groups (RR: 1.02; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.1; p = 0.56 and RR: 0.53; 95% CI, 0.14 to 1.93; p = 0.33). The mortality rate in emergency resection was higher compared to stent (RR: 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 10.89, p = 0.016).

LIMITATION

No randomized controlled trials are available.

CONCLUSION

Stent is a safe and successful alternative to emergency resection and may increase the rate of minimally invasive surgery. Emergency resection, however, remains safe and did not result in higher rate of anastomotic insufficiency. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to assess long-term outcomes.

Cervical myoma causing colonic obstruction in the first trimester of pregnancy - a case report

A 39-year-old nulliparous woman with a previously known cervical myoma was admitted to the obstetrics department during the first trimester with complaints of severe abdominal pain, lack of bowel movements and the suspicion of a clinical bowel obstruction. Because no literature on this exact condition could be found, clinical decisions were based on reports and practice in similar situations. Ultrasound revealed the progression of a cervical myoma (previously 9 cm across), now 12 × 12 × 11 cm in size and a distended large bowel. Sigmoidoscopy excluded intraluminal obstruction. The patient was treated with oral laxatives and enema without success and her condition deteriorated. The myomatous cervix was examined vaginally (bimanual manoeuvre) with the patient under anaesthesia; however, attempts to dislodge the obstruction proved unsuccessful. After surgical consultation the patient was planned for an emergency laparoscopic sigmoidostomy. The post-operative course was uneventful and the patient discharged. She delivered a healthy child with caesarean section in gestation week 36. Bowel continuity was later laparoscopically restored in conjunction with a hysterectomy. This case illustrates the importance of active multidisciplinary management in a case of severe colonic obstruction caused by pregnancy-related obstruction in the small pelvis. In this case, colonic perforation and abortion of the fetus were both avoided.

Preoptimisation in patients with acute obstructive colon cancer (PREOCC) - a prospective registration study protocol

BACKGROUND

Postoperative mortality and morbidity rates are high in patients with obstructing colon cancer (OCC). Different treatment options have been evaluated over the years, mainly for left sided OCC. Optimising the preoperative health condition in elective colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment shows promising results. The aim of this study is to determine whether preoptimisation is feasible in patients with OCC, with a special interest/focus on right-sided OCC, and if, ultimately, optimisation reduces mortality and morbidity (stoma rates, major and minor complications) rates in OCC.

METHODS

This is a prospective registration study including all patients presenting with OCC in our hospital. Patients with OCC, treated with curative intent, will be screened for eligibility to receive preoptimisation before surgery. The preoptimisation protocol includes; decompression of the small bowel with a NG-tube for right sided obstruction and SEMS or decompressing ileostomy or colostomy, proximal to the site of obstruction, for left sided colonic obstructions. For the additional work-up, additional nutrition by means of parenteral feeding (for patients who are dependent on a NG tube) or oral/enteral nutrition (in case the obstruction is relieved) is provided. Physiotherapy with attention to both cardio and muscle training prior surgical resection is provided. The primary endpoint is complication-free survival (CFS) at the 90 day period after hospitalisation. Secondary outcomes include pre- and postoperative complications, patient- and tumour characteristics, surgical procedures, total in hospital stay, creation of decompressing and/or permanent ileo- or colostomy and long-term (oncological) outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Preoptimisation is expected to improve the preoperative health condition of patients and thereby reduce postoperative complications.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Trial Registry: NL8266 date of registration: 06-jan-2020.

STUDY STATUS

Open for inclusion.

Acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction: Is there a role for endoscopic stenting?

The therapy of left-sided malignant colonic obstruction continues to be one of the largest problems in clinical practice. Numerous studies on colonic stenting for neoplastic colonic obstruction have been reported in the last decades. Thereby the role of self-expandable metal stents (SEMS) in the treatment of malignant colonic obstruction has become better defined. However, numerous prospective and retrospective investigations have highlighted serious concerns about a possible worse outcome after endoscopic colorectal stenting as a bridge to surgery, particularly in case of perforation. This review analyzes the most recent evidence in order to highlight pros and cons of SEMS placement in left-sided malignant colonic obstruction.

Stent as bridge to surgery decreases postoperative complications without worsening oncological outcomes: retrospective unicentric cohort study and stent placement protocol

BACKGROUND

Even if the use of stent as bridge to surgery (BTS) for obstructive colon cancer was described long ago, there is still much controversy on their use. Patient recovery before surgery and colonic desobstruction are just some of the reasons to defend this management that can be found in several available articles.

METHODS

This is a single-center, retrospective cohort study, including patients with obstructive colon cancer treated between 2010 and 2020. The primary aim of this study is to compare medium-term oncological outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival) between stent as BTS and ES groups. The secondary aims are to compare perioperative results (in terms of approach, morbidity and mortality, and rate of anastomosis/stomas) between both groups and, within the BTS group, analyze whether there are any factors that may influence oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 251 patients were included. Patients belonging to the BTS cohort presented a higher rate of laparoscopic approach, required less intensive care management, less reintervention, and less permanent stoma rate, when comparing with patients who underwent urgent surgery (US). There were not significant differences in terms of disease-free survival and overall survival between the two groups. Lymphovascular invasion negatively affected oncological results but was not related with stent placement.

CONCLUSION

The stent as a bridge to surgery is a good alternative to urgent surgery, which leads to a decrease in postoperative morbidity and mortality without significantly worsening oncological outcomes.

Colorectal Cancer-The "Parent" of Low Bowel Obstruction

Introduction: Despite the improvement of early diagnosis methods for multiple pathological entities belonging to the digestive tract, bowel obstruction determined by multiple etiologies represents an important percentage of surgical emergencies. General data: Although sometimes obstructive episodes are possible in the early stages of colorectal cancer, the most commonly installed intestinal obstruction has the significance of an advanced evolutionary stage of neoplastic disease. Development of Obstructive Mechanism: The spontaneous evolution of colorectal cancer is always burdened by complications. The most common complication is low bowel obstruction, found in approximately 20% of the cases of colorectal cancer, and it can occur either relatively abruptly, or is preceded by initially discrete premonitory symptoms, non-specific (until advanced evolutionary stages) and generally neglected or incorrectly interpreted. Success in the complex treatment of a low neoplastic obstruction is conditioned by a complete diagnosis, adequate pre-operative preparation, a surgical act adapted to the case (in one, two or three successive stages), and dynamic postoperative care. The moment of surgery should be chosen with great care and is the result of the experience of the anesthetic-surgical team. The operative act must be adapted to the case and has as its main objective the resolution of intestinal obstruction and only in a secondary way the resolution of the generating disease. Conclusions: The therapeutic measures adopted (medical-surgical) must have a dynamic character in accordance with the particular situation of the patient. Except for certain or probably benign etiologies, the possibility of colorectal neoplasia should always be considered, in low obstructions, regardless of the patient's age.

The Application of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery for Gastrectomy and Colorectal Resection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols not only positively affect gastrointestinal surgery outcomes but may also increase the risk of some complications. This meta-analysis was conducted to assess the impact of ERAS on the recovery and complications following gastrointestinal surgery. Materials and Methods: Studies published before December 2022 were retrieved from the following databases, EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science, without limitations of language or race. The endpoints included lung infection, surgical site infection, postoperative ileus, length of hospitalization, urinary tract infection, readmission, anastomotic leakage, and C-reactive protein serum levels. Results: A total of 23 studies were included. The results of the meta-analysis revealed that there was a decrease in incidence of the lung infection (risk ratio = 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.74, P = .002) and postoperative length of hospitalization (P < .00001). However, ERAS protocol groups had higher readmission rates, nausea, and vomiting. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anastomotic leakage, ileus, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection between the experimental and control groups. Conclusions: ERAS protocols can reduce the risk of postoperative lung infections, shorten hospital stays, and expedite patient recovery. Furthermore, ERAS protocols are not associated with serious complications following gastrointestinal surgeries.

Management of left-sided malignant colorectal obstructions with curative intent: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Several management options exist for colonic decompression in the setting of malignant large bowel obstruction, including oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and SEMS as a bridge-to-surgery. Consensus has yet to be reached on optimal treatment pathways. The aim of the present study was to perform a network meta-analysis comparing short-term postoperative morbidity and long-term oncologic outcomes between oncologic resection, surgical diversion, and self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) in left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction with curative intent.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared two or more of the following in patients presenting with curative left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction: (1) emergent oncologic resection; (2) surgical diversion; and/or (3) SEMS. The primary outcome was overall 90-day postoperative morbidity. Pairwise meta-analyses were performed with inverse variance random effects. Random-effect Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

From 1277 citations, 53 studies with 9493 patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection, 1273 patients undergoing surgical diversion, and 2548 patients undergoing SEMS were included. Network meta-analysis demonstrated a significant improvement in 90-day postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SEMS compared to urgent oncologic resection (OR0.34, 95%CrI0.01-0.98). Insufficient RCT data pertaining to overall survival (OS) precluded network meta-analysis. Pairwise meta-analysis demonstrated decreased five-year OS for patients undergoing urgent oncologic resection compared to surgical diversion (OR0.44, 95%CI0.28-0.71, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Bridge-to-surgery interventions may offer short- and long-term benefits compared to urgent oncologic resection for malignant colorectal obstruction and should be increasingly considered in this patient population. Further prospective study comparing surgical diversion and SEMS is needed.

High risk and low prevalence diseases: Mesenteric ischemia

INTRODUCTION

Mesenteric ischemia is a rare, frequently misdiagnosed, serious condition that carries with it a high rate of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

This review highlights the pearls and pitfalls of mesenteric ischemia, including presentation, diagnosis, and management in the emergency department (ED) based on current evidence.

DISCUSSION

Mesenteric ischemia is an abdominal vascular emergency that includes superior mesenteric arterial embolism, arterial thrombosis, venous mesenteric ischemia, and non-occlusive mesenteric ischemia. It is associated with a variety of risk factors including older age, cardiovascular disease, hypercoagulable state, and end-stage renal disease. The presentation depends on the underlying pathophysiology. While arterial embolic disease may present with sudden, severe pain, the early stages of the disease and other forms can present with vague symptoms, including generalized abdominal pain, weight loss, vomiting, and diarrhea. Laboratory testing can suggest the disease with leukocytosis and elevated lactate, but normal values should not be used to exclude the diagnosis. The imaging modality of choice is triple phase computed tomography with non-contrast, arterial, and delayed phases. The initial ED management includes fluid resuscitation, symptomatic therapy, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and anticoagulation. Emergent consultation with a multidisciplinary team including diagnostic and interventional radiologists and cardiovascular and general surgeons is necessary for definitive treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

An understanding of mesenteric ischemia can assist emergency clinicians in diagnosing and managing this disease.

Surgical outcomes and prognostic factors associated with emergency left colonic surgery

BACKGROUND

Mortality from emergency left-sided colorectal surgery can be substantial due to acuteness of the presentation and the urgent need to operate in the setting of a limited preparation in a morbid patient.

OBJECTIVES

Determine the 30-day postoperative outcomes and identify risk factors for complications and mortality following emergency colorectal operations.

DESIGN

Retrospective SETTINGS: Three tertiary hospitals in three countries.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Factors that were studied included age, sex, ASA score, type and extent of the operation, and presence/absence of malignancy. Unadjusted 30-day patient outcomes examined were complications and mortality. Differences in proportions were assessed using the Pearson chi-square test while logistic regression analyses were carried out to evaluate the correlation between risk factors and outcomes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality SAMPLE SIZE: 104 patients.

RESULTS

Among 104 patients, 70 (67.3%) were men, and 34 (32.7%) were women. The mean (SD) age was 57.2 (17.1) years. The most common indication for emergency colonic surgery was malignant obstruction in 33 (31.7%) patients. The postoperative complication rate was 24% (25/104), and the mortality rate was 12.5% (13/104) within 30 days of the operation. The ASA status (P=.02), presence of malignancy (P=.02), and the presence of complications (P=.004) were significantly related to mortality in the multivariable logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The 30-day mortality of emergency colorectal operations is greatly influenced by the presence of malignancy in the colon and physiological status at the time of the procedure.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective design and small sample size.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Oncologic impact of colonic stents for obstructive left-sided colon cancer

Colonic stenting has had a significant positive impact on the management of obstructive left-sided colon cancer (OLCC) in terms of both palliative treatment and bridge-to-surgery (BTS). Notably, many studies have convincingly demonstrated the effectiveness of stenting as a BTS, resulting in improvements in short-term outcomes and quality of life, safety, and efficacy in subsequent curative surgery, and increased cost-effectiveness, whereas the safety of chemotherapy after stenting and the long-term outcomes of stenting as a BTS are controversial. Several studies have suggested an increased risk of perforation in patients receiving bevacizumab chemotherapy after colonic stenting. In addition, several pathological analyses have suggested a negative oncological impact of colonic stenting. In contrast, many recent studies have demonstrated that colonic stenting for OLCC does not negatively impact the safety of chemotherapy or long-term oncological outcomes. The updated version of the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guidelines released in 2020 included colonic stenting as a BTS for OLCC as a recommended treatment. It should be noted that the experience of endoscopists is involved in determining technical and clinical success rates and possibly oncological outcomes. This review discusses the positive and negative impacts of colonic stenting on OLCC treatment, particularly in terms of oncology.

Large Bowel Perforation in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: A South African Perspective

Introduction

Large bowel perforation (LBP) occurs in up to 10% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and is a potential surgical emergency. Data on LBP in CRC patients from resource-limited countries are required to improve the management of this condition in these settings. Our study aimed to describe LBP amongst CRC patients in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

Materials and Methods

This was a descriptive sub-analysis of LBP data from an ongoing CRC registry. This study explores free and contained perforations and describes LBP characteristics, surgical management, histological findings, overall survival, and CRC recurrence.

Results

Ninety-four out of 2523 CRC patients had LBP (3.7%). The median age was 53.0 years (interquartile range: 43.0-64.0). The male-to-female ratio was 1.4:1. Thirty-three patients (35.1%) had a coexisting bowel obstruction. Tumor site perforations occurred in 87 patients (92.6%) and were mostly in the sigmoid colon (36.2%). Perforations were contained in 77 patients (81.9%). Eighty-nine patients (94.7%) underwent resection (elective resection: 76/89 patients, 85.4%). The post-operative inpatient mortality rate was 2.2%. Most patients had Stage III CRC (46 patients, 48.9%) and moderately differentiated tumors (77 patients, 81.9%). Overall survival at 12 months following CRC diagnosis was 55.4%. The early recurrence rate for CRC disease was 5.4%.

Conclusion

Tumor site perforations predominated, and most were contained. Patients were younger when compared with the international literature. We reaffirm that diastatic-free and contained perforations are two distinct clinical entities.

Outcomes of patients with perforated colon cancer: A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Perforated colon cancer (PCC) is a distinct clinical entity with implications for treatment and prognosis, however data on PCC seems scarce. The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the recent literature on clinical outcomes of PCC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase, Cochrane library and Google scholar was performed. Studies describing intentionally curative treatment for patients with PCC since 2010 were included. The main outcome measures consisted of short-term surgical complications and long-term oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Eleven retrospective cohort studies were included, comprising a total of 2696 PCC patients. In these studies, various entities of PCC were defined. Comparative studies showed that PCC patients as compared to non-PCC patients have an increased risk of 30-day mortality (8-33% vs 3-5%), increased post-operative complications (33-56% vs 22-28%), worse overall survival (36-40% vs 48-65%) and worse disease-free survival (34-43% vs 50-73%). Two studies distinguished free-perforations from contained perforations, revealing that free-perforation is associated with significantly higher 30-day mortality (19-26% vs 0-10%), lower overall survival (24-28% vs 42-64%) and lower disease-free survival (15% vs 53%) as compared to contained perforations.

CONCLUSION

Data on PCC is scarce, with various PCC entities defined in the studies included. Heterogeneity of the study population, definition of PCC and outcome measures made pooling of the data impossible. In general, perforation, particularly free perforation, seems to be associated with a substantial negative effect on outcomes in colon cancer patients undergoing surgery. Better definition and description of the types of perforation in future studies is essential, as outcomes seem to differ between types of PCC and might require different treatment strategies.