Cigdem Benlice

Laparoscopic IPAA is not associated with decreased rates of incisional hernia and small-bowel obstruction when compared with open technique: Long-term follow-up of a case-matched study

BACKGROUND: There are scant data on the presumed reduction of small-bowel obstruction and incisional hernia rates associated with laparoscopic IPAA. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare long-term outcomes after open vs laparoscopic IPAA based on a previous study from our institution. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study (from January 1992 through December 2007). SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a high-volume, specialized colorectal surgery department. PATIENTS: Patients included those who were enrolled in a previous institutional case-matched (2:1) study that examined 238 open and 119 laparoscopic IPAAs. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Long-term complications, including incisional hernia clinically detected by physician, adhesive small-bowel obstruction requiring hospital admission and surgery, pouch excision, and pouchitis rates, were collected. Laparoscopic abdominal colectomy followed by rectal dissection under direct vision (lower midline or Pfannenstiel incision) and converted cases were analyzed within the laparoscopic group. RESULTS: Groups were comparable with respect to age, sex, BMI, and extent of resection (completion proctectomy vs proctocolectomy), consistent with the original case matching. Mean follow-up was significantly longer in the open group (9.6 vs 8.1 years; p = 0.008). Open and laparoscopic operations were associated with similar incidences of incisional hernia (8.4% vs 5.9%; p = 0.40), small-bowel obstruction requiring hospital admission (26.1% vs 29.4%; p = 0.50), and small-bowel obstruction requiring surgery (8.4% vs 11.8%; p = 0.31). A subgroup analysis comparing 50 patients with laparoscopic rectal dissection versus 69 patients with rectal dissection under direct vision confirmed statistically similar incidences of incisional hernia, hospital admission, and surgery for small-bowel obstruction. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Some of the anticipated long-term benefits of laparoscopic IPAA could not be demonstrated in this cohort. The lack of such long-term benefits should be discussed with patients when proposing a laparoscopic approach.

Impact of the Specific Extraction-Site Location on the Risk of Incisional Hernia After Laparoscopic Colorectal Resection.

BACKGROUND: The impact of the specific incision used for specimen extraction during laparoscopic colorectal surgery on incisional hernia rates relative to other contributing factors remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the relationship between extraction-site location and incisional hernia after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study (January 2000 through December 2011). SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a high-volume, specialized colorectal surgery department. PATIENTS: All of the patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection were identified from our prospectively maintained institutional database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Extraction-site and port-site incisional hernias clinically detected by physician or detected on CT scan were collected. Converted cases, defined as the use of a midline incision to perform the operation, were kept in the intent-to-treat analysis. Specific extraction-site groups were compared, and other relevant factors associated with incisional hernia rates were also evaluated with univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2148 patients (54.0% with abdominal and 46.0% with pelvic operations) with a mean age of 51.7 ± 18.2 years (52% women) were reviewed. Used extraction sites were infraumbilical midline (23.7%), stoma site/right or left lower quadrant (15%), periumbilical midline (22.5%), and Pfannenstiel (29.6%) and midline converted (9.2%). Overall crude extraction site incisional hernia rate during a mean follow-up of 5.9 ± 3.0 years was 7.2% (n = 155). Extraction-site incisional hernia crude rates were highest after periumbilical midline (12.6%) and a midline incision used for conversion to open surgery (12.0%). Independent factors associated with extraction-site incisional hernia were any extraction sites compared with Pfannenstiel (periumbilical midline HR = 12.7; midline converted HR = 13.1; stoma site HR = 28.4; p < 0.001 for each), increased BMI (HR = 1.23; p = 0.002), synchronous port-site hernias (HR = 3.66; p < 0.001), and postoperative superficial surgical-site infection (HR = 2.11; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature, incisional hernia diagnoses based on clinical examination, and heterogeneous surgical population. CONCLUSIONS: Preferential extraction sites to minimize incisional hernia rates should be Pfannenstiel or incisions off the midline. Midline incisions should be avoided when possible.

Predictors of anastomotic leak in elderly patients after colectomy: nomogram-based assessment from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Program Procedure-Targeted Cohort

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients undergoing colorectal surgery have increasingly become under scrutiny by accounting for the largest fraction of geriatric postoperative deaths and a significant proportion of all postoperative complications, including anastomotic leak. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine predictors of anastomotic leak in elderly patients undergoing colectomy by creating a novel nomogram for simplistic prediction of anastomotic leak risk in a given patient. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective review. SETTINGS: The database review of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥65 years who underwent elective segmental colectomy with an anastomosis at different levels (abdominal or low pelvic) in 2012–2013 were identified from the multi-institutional procedure-targeted database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We constructed a stepwise multiple logistic regression model for anastomotic leak as an outcome; predictors were selected in a stepwise fashion using the Akaike information criterion. The validity of the nomogram was externally tested on elderly patients (≥65 years of age) from the 2014 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy-targeted database. RESULTS: A total of 10,392 patients were analyzed, and anastomotic leak occurred in 332 (3.2%). Of the patients who developed anastomotic leak, 192 (57.8%) were men (p < 0.001). Based on unadjusted analysis, factors associated with an increased risk of anastomotic leak were ASA score III and IV (p < 0.001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.004), diabetes mellitus (p = 0.003), smoking history (p = 0.014), weight loss (p = 0.013), previously infected wound (p = 0.005), omitting mechanical bowel preparation (p = 0.005) and/or preoperative oral antibiotic use (p < 0.001), and wounds classified as contaminated or dirty/infected (p = 0.008). Patients who developed anastomotic leak had a longer length of hospital stay (17 vs 7 d; p < 0.001) and operative time (191 vs 162 min; p < 0.001). A multivariate model and nomogram were created. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature and short-term follow-up (30 d). CONCLUSIONS: An accurate prediction of anastomotic leak affecting morbidity and mortality after colorectal surgery using the proposed nomogram may facilitate decision making in elderly patients for healthcare providers.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic vs open colectomy: an assessment from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted cohort

BACKGROUND Perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent hand-assisted colorectal laparoscopic (HALS) vs open colectomy were compared using recently released procedure-targeted database. METHODS Review was conducted using the 2012 colectomy-targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Patients were classified into 2 groups according to final surgical approach: HALS vs open (planned). Groups were matched (1:1) based on age, gender, body mass index, surgical procedure, diagnosis, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and wound classification. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted for group comparison. RESULTS Of 7,303 patients, 1,740 patients were matched in each group. Open group had higher proportion of patients with preoperative dyspnea (P = .01), ascites (P = .01), weight loss (P < .001), smoking history (P = .04), and increased work relative value units (P < .001). After adjusting for difference in baseline comorbidities, overall morbidity, superficial, deep, and organ-space surgical site infection, urinary tract infection, ileus, reoperation, readmission, and hospital stay were significantly higher in open group (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program targeted-data demonstrated several advantages of HALS compared with open colonic resection including shorter hospital stay and lower complication rate. Further adoption of HALS technique as a bridge to straight laparoscopy or tool in difficult cases can positively impact the short-term outcomes after colectomy when compared with open technique.

Robotic, laparoscopic, and open colectomy: a case-matched comparison from the ACS-NSQIP.

This study aimed to compare perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open colectomy using a procedure‐targeted database.

Comparison of Short-term Outcomes After Laparoscopic Versus Open Hartmann Reversal: A Case-matched Study.

Purpose: The aim of this study is to compare short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open Hartmann reversal. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent Hartmann reversal between January 2005 and September 2014 were identified and matched for age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and creation of diverting ileostomy to open counterparts. Patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes (30 d) were evaluated. Results: Eighteen patients with laparoscopic Hartmann reversal were matched to 18 open patients. There were no differences between laparoscopic versus open groups in terms of operative time (157.7±52.2 vs. 151.5±49.3 min, P>0.05) or overall complication rates [6 (33.3%) vs. 6 (33.3%) (P>0.05)]. No anastomotic leaks or mortality occurred in either group. However, the laparoscopic group was associated with significantly decreased estimated blood loss (114±103 vs. 217±125 mL, P<0.05), faster return of bowel function (3.2±0.6 vs. 4±0.6 d, P<0.05), and reduced hospital stay (5.4±3.1 vs. 8.3±4.8 d, P<0.05). Conclusions: Laparoscopic Hartmann reversal can be safely performed with better short-term outcomes in carefully selected patients.

Mesh herniorrhaphy with simultaneous colorectal surgery: a case-matched study from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

BACKGROUND The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of concurrent mesh herniorrhaphy on short-term outcomes of colorectal surgery by using a large, nationwide database. METHODS Patients who underwent simultaneous ventral hernia repair (VHR) and colorectal surgery between 2005 and 2010 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Patients who underwent VHR with mesh repair were case matched with patients who underwent VHR without mesh based on the type of colorectal procedure, diagnosis, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score. RESULTS Two hundred sixty-two patients who underwent VHR with mesh were case matched with 524 patients who underwent VHR without mesh. Mean operating time was significantly longer in patients who underwent VHR with mesh (195.8 ± 98.7 vs 164.3 ± 84.4 minutes, P < .001). Postoperative morbidity (P = .58), mortality (P = .27), superficial surgical site infection (SSI) (P = .14), deep SSI (P = .38), organ space SSI (P = .17), wound disruption (P > .99), reoperation (P = .48), and length of hospital stay (P = .71) were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data suggest that VHR with mesh does not increase 30-day mortality, medical or surgical morbidity in colorectal surgery setting.

An Effective Bundled Approach Reduces Surgical Site Infections in a High-Outlier Colorectal Unit

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections are the most common hospital-acquired infection after colorectal surgery, increasing morbidity, mortality, and hospital costs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of preventive measures on colorectal surgical site infection rates in a high-volume institution that performs inherent high-risk procedures. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a high-volume, specialized colorectal surgery department. PATIENTS: The Prospective Surgical Site Infection Prevention Bundle Project included 14 preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative measures to reduce surgical site infection occurrence after colorectal surgery. Surgical site infections within 30 days of the index operation were examined for patients during the 1-year period after the surgical site infection prevention bundle was implemented. The data collection and outcomes for this period were compared with the year immediately before the implementation of bundle elements. All of the patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery by a total of 17 surgeons were included. The following procedures were excluded from the analysis to obtain a homogeneous patient population: ileostomy closure and anorectal and enterocutaneous fistula repair. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgical site infection occurring within 30 days of the index operation was measured. Surgical site infection–related outcomes after implementation of the bundle (bundle February 2014 to February 2015) were compared with same period a year before the implementation of bundle elements (prebundle February 2013 to February 2014). RESULTS: Between 2013 and 2015, 2250 abdominal colorectal surgical procedures were performed, including 986 (43.8%) during the prebundle period and 1264 (56.2%) after the bundle project. Patient characteristics and comorbidities were similar in both periods. Compliance with preventive measures ranged between 75% and 99% during the bundle period. The overall surgical site infection rate decreased from 11.8% prebundle to 6.6% at the bundle period (P < 0.001). Although a decrease for all types of surgical site infections was observed after the bundle implementation, a significant reduction was achieved in the organ-space subgroup (5.5%–1.7%; P < 0.001). LIMITATION: We were unable to predict the specific contributions the constituent bundle interventions made to the surgical site infection reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The prospective Surgical Site Infection Prevention Bundle Project resulted in a substantial decline in surgical site infection rates in our department. Collaborative and enduring efforts among multiple providers are critical to achieve a sustained reduction See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A438.

Robotic partial intersphincteric resection with colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis for a very low rectal cancer.

In this video, we demonstrate robotic intersphincteric resection of a very low rectal cancer with establishment of intestinal continuity by hand-sewn colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis. This 53-year-old female with recently diagnosed with locally advanced very low rectal moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma and subsequently underwent 6 weeks of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Consent was obtained verbally for operation. For the resection, a 12-mm camera port was placed at the umbilicus, and three 8-mm robotic ports and additional two 5 mm were utilized for dissection and retraction. Once patient was positioned, the inferior mesenteric artery was identified and ligated; followed by medial to lateral approach, inferior mesenteric vein was identified and ligated. Subsequently, through the avascular plane, mesorectum was dissected totally down to the level of the pelvic floor with attention paid to not injure the ureter. Dissection was carried into the intersphincteric groove, and the puborectalis muscle was visualized from the end luminal part. This stage was confirmed by digital examination. Once the completely mobilization of the colon was achieved, intersphincteric dissection was started through the perineum. Mucosal incision was made just at the dentate line. Dissection between the external and internal sphincter was carried and reached proximally into the plane from the top. Ultimately, all the connections were freed up and the rectum was exteriorized by using wound protector. Bowel continuity was restored by an intracorporeal double-stapled colonic J-pouch anal anastomosis (video). Finally, decision was made, for functional purposes, to give the patient a diverting loop ileostomy. Patient had an uneventful recovery and was discharged on postoperative day three. Final pathology showed no residual tumor in the bowel wall and 0/13 nodes were involved. As a conclusion, robotic intersphincteric resection is technically feasible and safe for patients with low-lying rectal cancer. This approach provides a deeper dissection in the pelvic cavity with less technical difficulties.

Increased Caseload Volume is Associated With Better Oncologic Outcomes After Laparoscopic Resections for Colorectal Cancer.

Purpose: To evaluate the impact of caseload volume on the outcomes of open and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. Methods: Between April 1999 and January 2011, patients who underwent open or laparoscopic resection for colorectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent were identified. There were 2 groups of surgeons, whose primary practice is gastrointestinal surgery (n=5, group A) and general surgery (n=14, group B). Histopathologic and oncologic outcomes, as well as survival data were evaluated. Results: A total of 815 patients fulfilled the study criteria and 356 (group A: 120, group B: 236) patients who had >2 years’ follow-up data were included. Colorectal procedures constituted 33% and 19% of all the operations in A and B groups, respectively (P<0.0001). Among the colorectal cases, rates of laparoscopic surgery were 37% and 20% in the group A and B, respectively (P<0.0001). Practice pattern was independently associated with better overall survival and was favoring the group A (P=0.02). Conclusions: Increased caseload volume improves oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing colorectal resection for nonmetastatic cancer.