Jan Wind

Laparoscopy in combination with fast track multimodal management is the best perioperative strategy in patients undergoing colonic surgery: a randomized clinical trial (LAFA-study).

Objective:To investigate which perioperative treatment, ie, laparoscopic or open surgery combined with fast track (FT) or standard care, is the optimal approach for patients undergoing segmental resection for colon cancer. Summary Background Data:Important developments in elective colorectal surgery are the introduction of laparoscopy and implementation of FT care, both focusing on faster recovery. Methods:In a 9-center trial, patients eligible for segmental colectomy were randomized to laparoscopic or open colectomy, and to FT or standard care, resulting in 4 treatment groups. Primary outcome was total postoperative hospital stay (THS). Secondary outcomes were postoperative hospital stay (PHS), morbidity, reoperation rate, readmission rate, in-hospital mortality, quality of life at 2 and 4 weeks, patient satisfaction and in-hospital costs. Four hundred patients were required to find a minimum difference of 1 day in hospital stay. Results:Median THS in the laparoscopic/FT group was 5 (interquar-tile range: 4–8) days; open/FT 7 (5–11) days; laparoscopic/standard 6 (4.5–9.5) days, and open/standard 7 (6–13) days (P < 0.001). Median PHS in the laparoscopic/FT group was 5 (4–7) days; open/FT 6 (4.5–10) days; laparoscopic/standard 6 (4–8.5) days and open/standard 7 (6–10.5) days (P < 0.001). Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly among the groups. Regression analysis showed that laparoscopy was the only independent predictive factor to reduce hospital stay and morbidity. Conclusions:Optimal perioperative treatment for patients requiring segmental colectomy for colon cancer is laparoscopic resection embedded in a FT program. If open surgery is applied, it is preferentially done in FT care. This study was registered under NTR222 (www.trialregister.nl).

Perioperative strategy in colonic surgery; LAparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care (LAFA trial)

BackgroundRecent developments in large bowel surgery are the introduction of laparoscopic surgery and the implementation of multimodal fast track recovery programs. Both focus on a faster recovery and shorter hospital stay.The randomized controlled multicenter LAFA-trial (LAparoscopy and/or FAst track multimodal management versus standard care) was conceived to determine whether laparoscopic surgery, fast track perioperative care or a combination of both is to be preferred over open surgery with standard care in patients having segmental colectomy for malignant disease.Methods/designThe LAFA-trial is a double blinded, multicenter trial with a 2 × 2 balanced factorial design. Patients eligible for segmental colectomy for malignant colorectal disease i.e. right and left colectomy and anterior resection will be randomized to either open or laparoscopic colectomy, and to either standard care or the fast track program. This factorial design produces four treatment groups; open colectomy with standard care (a), open colectomy with fast track program (b), laparoscopic colectomy with standard care (c), and laparoscopic surgery with fast track program (d). Primary outcome parameter is postoperative hospital length of stay including readmission within 30 days. Secondary outcome parameters are quality of life two and four weeks after surgery, overall hospital costs, morbidity, patient satisfaction and readmission rate.Based on a mean postoperative hospital stay of 9 +/- 2.5 days a group size of 400 patients (100 each arm) can reliably detect a minimum difference of 1 day between the four arms (alfa = 0.95, beta = 0.8). With 100 patients in each arm a difference of 10% in subscales of the Short Form 36 (SF-36) questionnaire and social functioning can be detected.DiscussionThe LAFA-trial is a randomized controlled multicenter trial that will provide evidence on the merits of fast track perioperative care and laparoscopic colorectal surgery in patients having segmental colectomy for malignant disease.

Implementation of a Fast-Track Perioperative Care Program: What Are the Difficulties?

Background: To evaluate the feasibility of a fast-track (FT) program and it’s effect on postoperative recovery. Methods: All patients, scheduled for elective segmental colorectal resection were treated in a FT program (FT group). Data were compared to a control group operated for elective colorectal resections and treated in a traditional care program (TC group). Data from the FT group were collected prospectively, data from the TC group retrospectively. Outcome parameters included the number of successfully applied FT modalities, patient satisfaction, morbidity rate, re-operation rate, primary (PHS) and total hospital stay (THS), and readmission rate. Results: One-hundred and seven patients were included (55 FT group vs. 52 TC group). The groups were comparable for patient characteristics such as age and cr-POSSUM score (p = 0.22 and p = 0.40). An average of 7.4 of 13 predefined FT modalities were successfully achieved per patient. Patient satisfaction was comparable (p = 0.84). Seven versus 5 patients required a re-operation in the FT and TC groups, respectively (p = 0.52). Morbidity rate was comparable (n = 16 vs. 15, p = 0.83). Median PHS was 4.0 vs. 6.0 days and median THS was 4.0 vs. 6.5 days in the FT and TC groups (p < 0.01 and p < 0.03, respectively). Six vs. 3 patients were re-admitted in the FT and TC groups, respectively (p = 0.49). Conclusion: Implementation of all FT modalities was difficult since a rather low number of pre-defined FT modalities was effectively realized. Despite incomplete implementation, PHS and THS were shorter in the FT group without affecting patient satisfaction.

Which fast track elements predict early recovery after colon cancer surgery

Aim  It is questioned whether all separate fast track elements are essential for enhanced postoperative recovery. We aimed to determine which baseline characteristics and which fast track elements are independent predictors of faster postoperative recovery in patients undergoing resection for colon cancer.

Fibrin glue and transanal rectal advancement flap for high transsphincteric perianal fistulas; is there any advantage?

Backgrounds and aimIn recent decades, fibrin glue has appeared as an alternative treatment for high perianal fistulas. Early results seemed promising, with high success rates being reported. However, with increasing follow-up, the enthusiasm was tempered because of disappointing results. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the additional value of fibrin glue in combination with transanal advancement flap, compared to advancement flap alone, for the treatment of high transsphincteric fistulas of cryptoglandular origin.Materials and methodsBetween January 1995 and January 2006, 127 patients were operated for high perianal fistulas with an advancement flap. After exclusion of patients with inflammatory bowel disease or HIV, 80 patients remained. A consecutive series of 26 patients had an advancement flap combined with obliteration of the fistula tract with fibrin glue. Patients were matched for prior fistula surgery, and the advancement was performed identically in all patients. In the fibrin glue group, glue was installed retrogradely in the fistula tract after the advancement was completed and the fistula tract had been curetted.ResultsMinimal follow-up after surgery was 13 months [median of 67 months (range, 13–127)]. The overall recurrence rate was 26% (n = 21). Recurrence rates for advancement flap alone vs the combination with glue were 13% vs 56% (p = 0.014) in the group without previous fistula surgery and 23% vs 41% (p = 0.216) in the group with previous fistula surgery.ConclusionObliterating the fistula tract with fibrin glue was associated with worse outcome after rectal advancement flap for high perianal fistulas.

Short-Term Outcomes after Laparoscopic Ileocolic Resection for Crohn’s Disease

Background: No consensus exists whether ileocolic resection for Crohn’s disease (CD) should be carried out by a laparoscopic or open approach. A systematic review was conducted to assess the evidence for short-term advantages of laparoscopic compared to open resection for ileocolic CD. Methods: The literature search was conducted over the period 01/1991 to 02/2006. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), clinical controlled trials and comparative studies comparing laparoscopic with open resection for ileocolic CD were included. A quality assessment was performed for all retrieved articles. The main outcome parameters were operating times, conversion rates, major and minor morbidity and hospital stays. Results: 14 publications encompassing 729 patients were included – 2 were RCTs, 12 were non-RCTs of which 2 were case-matched studies. Although pooling data of operating times was statistically not possible, they were longer for the laparoscopic procedure in the individual studies ranging from 75 to 185 min. Conversions varied between 0 and 16.7%. Postoperative complications requiring reoperation or reported overall morbidity were not different (risk difference –0.01 and –0.05, respectively). Hospital stay after the laparoscopic procedure was 1.90 days shorter (95% CI: 0.83–2.97). Conclusion: There is evidence that laparoscopic ileocolic resection for CD is associated with shorter hospital stay compared to open ileocolic resection, while morbidity rates are equal and conversion rates are acceptable

Laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Anastomotic leakage is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. The aim of this study was to assess the potential benefits of a laparoscopic reintervention for anastomotic leakage after primary laparoscopic surgery.

Single-stage closure of enterocutaneous fistula and stomas in the presence of large abdominal wall defects using the components separation technique

BACKGROUND Closure of an enterocutaneous fistula and/or stomas in the presence of large abdominal wall defects is a challenging problem. In the present study, the results of the components separation technique are described. METHODS All patients with an enterocutaneous fistula and/or stomas in the presence of large abdominal wall defects (ie, laparostomy of ventral hernia) who underwent a single-stage repair using the components separation technique in the period from January 2000 to July 2007 were reviewed retrospectively. RESULTS A total of 32 patients were included. The median operating time was 204 minutes (range 87-573). In 18 patients, additionally to the components separation, an absorbable mesh was used. Postoperatively, in 16 patients 22 complications were reported. There were 9 patients with local wound problems. The median postoperative hospital stay was 12 days (range 5-74). Seven patients developed a ventral hernia. Four of them were small asymptomatic recurrences. Four out of the 15 patients with an enterocutaneous fistula developed a recurrent fistula. The median follow-up was 20 months (range 3-54). CONCLUSION Closure of enterocutaneous fistula and/or stomas and simultaneous repair of large abdominal wall defects is feasible using the components separation technique but morbidity is considerable. Early recurrence of abdominal hernia and fistula is acceptable.

Litigation after Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: An Evaluation of the Dutch Arbitration System for Medical Malpractice

BACKGROUND Medical liability is a great concern in current surgical practice. The medical liability system in the US is under discussion in surgical literature, as the system is associated with high costs and expensive liability premiums. The aim of this study was to evaluate the Dutch arbitration system for claims filed after bile duct injury (BDI). STUDY DESIGN Data were extracted from the largest Dutch insurance company for medical liability. Outcomes of the claim and factors associated with awarded financial compensation were determined. RESULTS BDI litigation after laparoscopic cholecystectomy occurred in 0.08% (+/- 0.02% SD) without a substantial increase. Currently, 88 of 133 claims are closed after a median duration of 2 years (range 5 months to 6.5 years). In 61 of 88 cases (69%) liability was rejected, and in 16 cases (18%) liability was acknowledged. Median compensation (in Euros) was euro 9.826,07 (range euro 15,88 to euro 55.301,06). Rejection of liability increased from 50% in the period 1994 to 1998 versus 72% in 2004 to 2006 (p = 0.023). Factors associated with recognition were patient employment (p = 0.005) and patient death (p = 0.01). Factors associated with an increase in financial compensation are delay in imaging (p = 0.033), delay in diagnosis (p = 0.009), and relaparotomy with repair in the initial hospital (p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS The Dutch arbitration system for medical liability after BDI is associated with a short time to resolution and high rejection rates, and payments to BDI patients are low.

Medical liability insurance claims on entry-related complications in laparoscopy.

BackgroundInstallation of the pneumoperitoneum is an essential part of laparoscopic surgery. Creation can be performed by either the open or a closed technique. The aim of this study was to assess the number of and contributing factors to entry-related complications in medical liability insurance claims in the Netherlands.MethodsA retrospective chart review was performed, including all malpractice claims filed at MediRisk, which is presently the largest medical liability mutual insurance company for institutions, mainly hospitals, in healthcare in the Netherlands.ResultsFrom January 1993 to December 2005, 41 claims were identified as entry-related complications which comprised 18% of all laparoscopy-related complications leading to claims. Most were young (median age = 35 years) female patients who had routine, nonadvanced, laparoscopic procedures planned as short-stay or day-care procedures. The claims were equally divided between general surgery (n = 20) and gynecology (n = 21). A total of 51 structures were injured. There were 18 vascular structure injuries, 30 bowel injuries, and three other injuries. An open entry technique was used in only two (5%) patients. Vascular injury was exclusively associated with closed entry. In only 19 (46%) patients the entry-related complication was diagnosed peroperatively, consisting of 70% of the vascular and 25% of the bowel injuries. Twenty-six patients (64%) were admitted to the intensive care unit for a median of five days. There was no mortality. Besides conversion, the majority of the patients filed a claim to compensate for a longer hospital stay and related costs. A payment was made in 17 (57%) of the 30 settled claims.ConclusionsMedical liability claims concerning laparoscopic entry-related complications comprised a fifth of all laparoscopy-related claims. Claims concerning entry-related complications occurred in young patients who had routine, nonadvanced procedures. In the investigated cases most claims involved the closed-entry technique.