Surgeons' practice and preferences for the anal fissure treatment: results from an international survey

The best nonoperative or operative anal fissure (AF) treatment is not yet established, and several options have been proposed. Aim is to report the surgeons' practice for the AF treatment. Thirty-four multiple-choice questions were developed. Seven questions were about to participants' demographics and, 27 questions about their clinical practice. Based on the specialty (general surgeon and colorectal surgeon), obtained data were divided and compared between two groups. Five-hundred surgeons were included (321 general and 179 colorectal surgeons). For both groups, duration of symptoms for at least 6 weeks is the most important factor for AF diagnosis (30.6%). Type of AF (acute vs chronic) is the most important factor which guide the therapeutic plan (44.4%). The first treatment of choice for acute AF is ointment application for both groups (59.6%). For the treatment of chronic AF, this data is confirmed by colorectal surgeons (57%), but not by the general surgeons who prefer the lateral internal sphincterotomy (LIS) (31.8%) (p = 0.0001). Botulin toxin injection is most performed by colorectal surgeons (58.7%) in comparison to general surgeons (20.9%) (p = 0.0001). Anal flap is mostly performed by colorectal surgeons (37.4%) in comparison to general surgeons (28.3%) (p = 0.0001). Fissurectomy alone is statistically significantly most performed by general surgeons in comparison to colorectal surgeons (57.9% and 43.6%, respectively) (p = 0.0020). This analysis provides useful information about the clinical practice for the management of a debated topic such as AF treatment. Shared guidelines and consensus especially focused on operative management are required to standardize the treatment and to improve postoperative results.

Prospective Italian validation of the Vaizey and Wexner and fecal incontinence severity index (FISI) questionnaires

Several objective severity measurement questionnaires of the fecal incontinence (FI), are available to describe type, frequency and degree of FI, and their impact on quality of life, aiming to establish baseline scores measure response to treatment over time and allow comparison among patients treated using different strategies. Presently, despite their widespread use in clinical practice, none of these questionnaire have been validated in the Italian language. The aim is to test the translated Italian version of the Vaizey and Wexner and Fecal Incontinence Severity Index (FISI) questionnaires assessing their reliability and validity among Italian-speaking patients. Two researchers proficient in spoken English and Italian translated both questionnaires in the Italian language. They independently translated the two questionnaires from English and then they met to produce a single version of the two questionnaires, to solve any possible discrepancy. A forward-backward translation was then obtained by a professional bilingual translator, so as to define the final version of the questionnaires. The questionnaires were independently administered twice to 100 Italian-speaking patients by two different and independent raters. Cronbach's α of the first and second Vaizey and Wexner questionnaire was 0.755 and 0.727, respectively. While Cronbach's α of the first and second FISI questionnaire was 0.810 and 0.806, respectively. Spearman correlation and inter-rater reliability were 0.937 and 0.913 for Vaizey and Wexner questionnaire, respectively, and 0.915 and 0.871 for FISI questionnaire, respectively. Italian version of the Vaizey and Wexner and FISI questionnaires proved good consistency, reliability, reproducibility, showing good psychometric properties.

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

BACKGROUND

Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres.

METHODS

This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low-middle-income countries.

RESULTS

In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of 'single-use' consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low-middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia.

CONCLUSION

This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high- and low-middle-income countries.

Long-term Oncological Results After Laparoscopic Sigmoidectomy for Adenocarcinoma

Purpose: Sigmoidectomy is performed in most cases for benign pathologies and mainly in cases of diverticulitis. Few studies in the literature report oncological results after sigmoidectomy for adenocarcinoma. The aim of this study was to report the long-term oncological outcomes after elective laparoscopic sigmoidectomy (LS) for adenocarcinoma. Methods: This study is a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. From January 2003 to February 2021, 173 patients underwent elective LS for adenocarcinoma. Twenty-four patients with a diagnosis of preoperative distant metastases were excluded (13.9%). Results: Seven postoperative complications were observed (7.1%). Of these, 2 (2%) anastomotic leakages were treated surgically by the Hartmann procedure (Clavien-Dindo grade III-b). The mean number of harvested lymph nodes with the specimen was 14.2 ± 7.1. At a median follow-up of 115 months (interquartile range 133.8), 2 (2%) and 9 patients (9.2%) had developed recurrence and metastases, respectively. During follow-up, 6 patients (6.1%) with metastases died due to disease progression and 6 other patients (6.1%) died due to causes other than cancer related. At the 5- and 10-year follow-ups, the overall survival rates were 90.5% ± 3.4% and 83.8% ± 4.5%, respectively, while the disease-free survival rates were 87.1% ± 4.1% and 83.5% ± 4.7%, respectively. Conclusion: LS is a safe and feasible technique both in terms of the number of harvested lymph nodes and oncological results. The possibility of sparing the colon without mobilizing the splenic flexure and dividing the left colic artery could reduce intra- and postoperative complications. Further studies with larger samples of patients are required to confirm these data.

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM

The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR.

METHOD

Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed.

RESULTS

Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%).

CONCLUSION

The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.

Extracorporeal Hand-Sewn vs. Intracorporeal Mechanic Anastomosis During Laparoscopic Right Colectomy

Background and Objectives

To compare the outcomes of extracorporeal hand-sewn side-to-side isoperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis (EHSIA) versus intracorporeal mechanic side-to-side isoperistaltic ileocolic anastomosis (IMSIA) during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for adenocarcinoma.

Methods

This is a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis of prospectively collected data. Fifty-four patients who underwent surgery with EHSIA (intervention group) were paired with 54 patients who underwent surgery with IMSIA (control group) based on patients' demographics and type of surgery (standard right hemicolectomy or extended right hemicolectomy).

Results

Fifty-four patients were included for each group. Statistically significant differences between groups were not observed in patients' demographics and type of surgery. Conversion occurred in three patients of the intervention group due to intra-abdominal adhesions for previous surgery (5.6%) (p = 0.079). Median operative time was statistically significant shorter in the control group in comparison to the intervention group (85 and 117.5 minutes, respectively, p ≤ 0.0001). In both groups one anastomotic leakage was observed (1.9%) (Clavien-Dindo grade III-a). In the control group one patient (1.9%) underwent reintervention for acute postoperative anemia (Clavien-Dindo grade III-b). Median number of harvested lymph-nodes was 17 and 12 (p ≤ 0.0001), in the intervention and the control group, respectively. Median hospital stay was statistically significant lower in the control group in comparison to the intervention group (5 and 6.5 days, respectively, p ≤ 0.013).

Conclusion

IMSIA showed lower operative time and hospital stay in comparison to EHSIA. Further randomized studies are required to draw definitive conclusions about the best anastomotic technique during laparoscopic right hemicolectomy.

Ostomy closure rate during COVID-19 pandemic: an Italian multicentre observational study

During the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, most of the surgical procedures were performed for emergencies or oncologic reasons to the detriment of the remaining elective procedures for benign conditions. Ileostomy or colostomy creation are sequelae of oncologic or emergency colorectal surgery, but their closure does not fall within the definition of oncologic or emergency surgery. The aim of this retrospective multicentre observational study is to report the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on the ostomy closure rate in Italy. Data regarding ileostomy and colostomy creation and closure from 24 Italian centres, during the study period (March 2020–February 2021) and during the control period (March 2019–February 2020) were collected. Three hospitals (12.5%) were COVID free. The number of colostomies and ileostomies created and closed in the same period was lower ( -18.8% and -30%, respectively) in the study period in comparison to the control period (p = 0.1915 and p = 0.0001, respectively), such as the ostomies closed in the analysed periods but created before (colostomy -36.2% and ileostomy -7.4%, p = 0.2211 and p = 0.1319, respectively). Overall, a 19.5% reduction in ostomies closed occurred in the study period. Based on the present study, a reduction in ostomy closure rate occurred in Italy between March 2020 and February 2021. During the pandemic, the need to change the clinical practice probably prolonged deterioration of quality of life in patients with ostomies, increasing number of stomas that will never be closed, and related management costs, even if these issues have not been investigated in this study.

Surgical management protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic in an Italian non-referral center

BACKGROUND

In the surgical scenario, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diffusion worldwide entails on the one hand the need to continue to perform surgery at least in case of emergency or oncologic surgery, in patients with or without COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19); and on the other hand, to avoid the pandemic diffusion both between patients and medical and nursing team. The aim of this study was to report our surgical management protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic in an Italian non-referral center.

METHODS

Data retrieved during the outbreak for the COVID-19 pandemic, from March 8 to May 4, 2020 (study period) were analyzed and compared to data obtained during the same period in 2019 (control period).

RESULTS

During the study period, 41 surgical procedures (24 electives, 17 emergency surgical procedures) underwent surgery in comparison to 99 procedures in the control period. Stratifying the procedures in elective and emergency surgery, and based on the indication for surgery, the only statistically significant difference was observed in the elective surgery regarding the abdominal wall surgery (0 vs. 13 procedures, P=0.0339). Statistically significant differences were not observed regarding the colorectal and the breast oncologic surgery. All stuff members were COVID-19 free.

CONCLUSIONS

The present protocol proved to be safe and useful to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection before and after surgery for both patients and stuff. The pandemic was responsible for the reduction in number of procedures performed, anyway for the oncologic surgery a statistically significant volume reduction in comparison to 2019 was not observed.

Surgical management protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic in an Italian non-referral center

BACKGROUND

In the surgical scenario, the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) diffusion worldwide entails on the one hand the need to continue to perform surgery at least in case of emergency or oncologic surgery, in patients with or without COronaVIrus Disease 2019 (COVID-19); and on the other hand, to avoid the pandemic diffusion both between patients and medical and nursing team. The aim of this study was to report our surgical management protocol during the COVID-19 pandemic in an Italian non-referral center.

METHODS

Data retrieved during the outbreak for the COVID-19 pandemic, from March 8 to May 4, 2020 (study period) were analyzed and compared to data obtained during the same period in 2019 (control period).

RESULTS

During the study period, 41 surgical procedures (24 electives, 17 emergency surgical procedures) underwent surgery in comparison to 99 procedures in the control period. Stratifying the procedures in elective and emergency surgery, and based on the indication for surgery, the only statistically significant difference was observed in the elective surgery regarding the abdominal wall surgery (0 vs. 13 procedures, P=0.0339). Statistically significant differences were not observed regarding the colorectal and the breast oncologic surgery. All stuff members were COVID-19 free.

CONCLUSIONS

The present protocol proved to be safe and useful to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection before and after surgery for both patients and stuff. The pandemic was responsible for the reduction in number of procedures performed, anyway for the oncologic surgery a statistically significant volume reduction in comparison to 2019 was not observed.

Effect of Lockdown in Surgical Emergency Accesses: Experience of a COVID-19 Hospital

BACKGROUND/AIM

SARS-CoV-2 pandemic imposed extraordinary restriction measures and a complete reorganization of the Health System. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on emergency surgical department accesses.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients admitted to surgical emergency departments was retrospectively recorded during the Lockdown (March 11, 2020-May 3, 2020) and compared with the same number of days in 2019 and immediately before Lockdown (January 16, 2020-March 10, 2020). Diagnoses, priority levels, modes of patient's transportation, waiting times and outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

During the lockdown phase, we ob-served a reduction in the access to emergency surgical departments of 84.45% and 79.78%, com-pared with the Pre-Lockdown2019 and Pre-Lockdown2020 groups, respectively. Patient's transportation, hospitalization and patients discharge with indications to an outpatient visit, waiting and total times exhibited a significant difference during the lockdown (p<0.005).

CONCLUSION

We observed a reduction of surgical emergency accesses during the lockdown. Implementing the use of the regional systems and preventing overcrowding of emergency departments could be beneficial for reducing waiting times and improving the quality of treatments for patients.

Mid-transverse colon cancer and extended versus transverse colectomy: Results of the Italian society of surgical oncology colorectal cancer network (SICO CCN) multicenter collaborative study

INTRODUCTION

Transverse colon cancer (TCC) is poorly studied, and TCC cases are often excluded from large prospective randomized trials because of their complexity and their potentially high complication rate. The best surgical approach for TCC has yet to be established. The aim of this large retrospective multicenter Italian series is to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of both hemicolectomy and transverse colectomy in order to identify the best surgical approach.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with mid-transverse colon cancer treated with a segmental colon resection or an extended hemicolectomy (right or left) between 2006 and 2016 in 28 high-volume (more than 70 procedures/year) Italian referral centers for colorectal surgery.

RESULTS

The study included 1529 patients, 388 of whom underwent a segmental resection while 1141 underwent an extended resection. A higher number of complications has been reported in the segmental group than in the extended group (30.1% versus 23.6%; p 0.010). In 42 cases the main complication was the anastomotic leak (4.4% versus 2.2%; p 0.020). Recovery outcomes also showed statistical differences: time to first flatus (p 0.014), time to first mobilization (p 0.040), and overall hospital stay (p < 0.001) were significantly shorter in the extended group. Even if overall survival were similar between the groups (95.1% versus 97%; p 0.384), 3-year disease-free survival worsened after segmental resection (78.1% versus 86.2%; p 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our results, an extended right colon resection for TCC seems to be surgically safer and more oncologically valid.

Anastomotic leakage following laparoscopic resection of low and mid rectal cancer

PURPOSE

Anastomotic leakage is considered the commonest major complication after surgery for rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent laparoscopic LAR or ULAR for rectal cancer were recruited. The primary outcome was the incidence of the AL during 30 days postoperative.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine consecutive patients were included in the study. Fifty-three patients underwent LAR with stapled colorectal anastomoses, while the remaining 6 patients underwent ULAR with hand-sewn coloanal anastomoses. The median duration of operation was 195 minutes (range; 120-315). The defunctioning ileostomy was created in 24 (7%) patients. Overall, there was no recorded mortality. Only 10 (17%) patients developed complications. There were only 4 patients who developed AL. Three patients had a subclinical AL as they had defunctioning ileostomy at the time of the initial procedure, the diagnosis was made by CT with rectal contrast. They were treated conservatively with transanal anastomotic drainage under endoscopic guidance. One patient had a clinically significant AL, demonstrated as a peritonitis. This patient required reoperation during which pelvic abscess was drained, resection of the previous anastomosis, and hartmann's colostomy was performed.

CONCLUSION

Standardization of a definition, as well as, criteria for the diagnosis of AL, will help in comparison of the results and the surgical techniques in order to optimize the required care offered to rectal cancer patients. On expert hands, it is feasible to perform a laparoscopic sphincter-saving total mesorectal excision, additionally, it provides the advantages of a clear view of the deep pelvis and facilitates a precise sharp dissection.

KEY WORDS

Anastomosis, Anastomotic Leakage, Rectal cancer, Total mesorectal excision.