Crippa, Jacopo

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak remains a critical complication after restorative rectal cancer surgery and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates, whereas reported rates range from 4% to 29%. Whether the occurrence of leak may have an impact on long-term oncological outcomes is under debate. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the oncological impact of anastomotic leak on patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a high-volume colorectal center. PATIENTS: Data on patients who underwent restorative surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2000 until December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the impact of anastomotic leak, defined according to the classification proposed by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer, on long-term overall survival, disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, and local recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 787 patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer met the inclusion criteria. Forty-two (5.3%) patients presented a symptomatic anastomotic leak. The median follow-up period was 64 months. Fifty-one (6.5%) patients experienced a cancer-related death, 2 of 42 in the anastomotic leak group. Five-year overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival were 88%, 94.7%, and 85.3%. Local recurrence rate was 2%. There was no difference in long-term overall survival, disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rate between groups. On a multivariable analysis, anastomotic leak did not impact oncological outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by retrospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of anastomotic leak after restorative resection for rectal cancer did not impact long-term oncological outcomes in our cohort of patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. RESULTADOS ONCOLÓGICOS A LARGO PLAZO DESPUÉS DE UNA FUGA ANASTOMÓTICA EN CIRUGÍA DE CÁNCER RECTAL ANTECEDENTES: La fuga anastomótica sigue siendo una complicación crítica después de la cirugía restauradora del cáncer rectal y se asocia con tasas significativas de morbilidad y mortalidad, mientras que las tasas reportadas varían del 4% al 29%. Se está debatiendo si la aparición de fugas puede tener un impacto en los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo. OBJETIVO: Describir el impacto oncológico de la fuga anastomótica en pacientes sometidos a cirugía de preservación del esfínter para adenocarcinoma rectal. DISEÑO: Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente. MARCO: El estudio se realizó en un centro colorrectal de alto volumen. PACIENTES: Se analizaron retrospectivamente los datos de pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía reparadora por adenocarcinoma rectal desde Enero de 2000 hasta Diciembre de 2013. MEDIDAS PRINCIPALES DE RESULTADOS: Impacto de la fuga anastomótica, definida de acuerdo con la clasificación propuesta por el Grupo de Estudio Internacional del Cáncer Rectal (International Study Group of Rectal Cancer), sobre la supervivencia general a largo plazo, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la recurrencia local. RESULTADOS: Un total de 787 pacientes sometidos a cirugía para preservar el esfínter por cáncer rectal cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. Cuarenta y dos (5.3%) pacientes presentaron una fuga anastomótica sintomática. El tiempo mediano del período de seguimiento fue de 64 meses. Cincuenta y un (6.5%) pacientes sufrieron muerte relacionada con el cáncer, 2 de 42 en el grupo de fuga anastomótica. La supervivencia global a cinco años, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la supervivencia libre de enfermedad fueron del 88%, 94.7% y 85.3%, respectivamente. La tasa de recurrencia local fue del 2%. No hubo diferencias en la supervivencia global a largo plazo, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad y la tasa de recurrencia local entre los grupos. En un análisis multivariable, la fuga anastomótica no afectó los resultados oncológicos. LIMITACIONES: Este estudio fue limitado por análisis retrospectivo. CONCLUSIONES: La aparición de fuga anastomótica después de la resección restauradora para el cáncer rectal no afectó los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo en nuestra cohorte de pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. (Traducción—Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Kahlil)

Objective: To compare short term outcomes of patients undergoing laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery. Background: Significant benefits of robotic rectal cancer surgery over laparoscopy have yet to be demonstrated. Operative time and direct institutional cost seem in favor of the laparoscopic approach. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of consecutive patients operated on for rectal cancer with a mini-invasive approach at Mayo Clinic from 2005 to 2018. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the difference in postoperative morbidity between the laparoscopic and robotic approach. Multivariable models for odds to complications and prolonged (≥6 days) length of stay were built. Results: A total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The number of patients undergoing robotic surgery was 317 (52.8%). The 2 groups were similar in respect to age, sex, and body mass index. Laparoscopic surgery was correlated to shorter operative time (214 vs 324 minutes; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing robotic surgery had a lower overall complications rate (37.2% vs 51.2%; P < 0.001). Robotic surgery was found to be the most protective factor [odds ratio (OR) 0.485; P = 0.006] for odds to complications. The event of a complication (OR 9.33; P < 0.001) and conversion to open surgery (OR 3.095; P = 0.002) were identified as risk factors for prolonged length of stay whereas robotic surgery (OR 0.62; P = 0.027) was the only independent protective factor. Conclusions: Robotic rectal cancer surgery is strongly associated with better short-term outcomes over laparoscopic surgery.

Abstract Background The aim of this study was to review risk factors for conversion in a cohort of patients with rectal cancer undergoing minimally invasive abdominal surgery. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed of consecutive patients operated on from February 2005 to April 2018. Adult patients undergoing low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection for primary rectal adenocarcinoma by a minimally invasive approach were included. Exclusion criteria were lack of research authorization, stage IV or recurrent rectal cancer, and emergency surgery. Risk factors for conversion were investigated using logistic regression. A subgroup analysis of obese patients (BMI 30 kg/m2 or more) was performed. Results A total of 600 patients were included in the analysis. The overall conversion rate was 9·2 per cent. Multivariable analysis showed a 72 per cent lower risk of conversion when patients had robotic surgery (odds ratio (OR) 0·28, 95 per cent c.i. 0·15 to 0·52). Obese patients experienced a threefold higher risk of conversion compared with non-obese patients (47 versus 24·4 per cent respectively; P &lt; 0·001). Robotic surgery was associated with a reduced risk of conversion in obese patients (OR 0·22, 0·07 to 0·71). Conclusion Robotic surgery was associated with a lower risk of conversion in patients undergoing minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery, in both obese and non-obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus remains an issue after colorectal surgery delaying recovery and increasing the length of hospital stay and costs. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of perioperative fluid management on ileus occurrence after colorectal surgery within a fully implemented enhanced recovery pathway. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained institutional database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a tertiary academic facility with fully implemented standardized enhanced recovery pathway over the entire study period. PATIENTS: All of the consecutive elective major colorectal resections for benign or malign indications between 2011 and 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Postoperative ileus was defined as the need for nasogastric tube reinsertion. Perioperative fluid management and surgical outcome were compared between patients presenting with ileus and those without. Potential risk factors for ileus were identified through multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: Postoperative ileus occurred in 377 (9%) of 4205 included patients at day 4 (interquartile range, 2–5 d). Intraoperatively, ileus patients received 3.2 ± 2.6 L of fluids, whereas the remaining patients received 2.5 ± 1.7 L (p < 0.001). Weight gain was 3.8 ± 7.1 kg in ileus patients versus 3.0 ± 6.6 kg (p = 0.272) in the remaining patients at postoperative day 1, 4.4 ± 6.5 kg versus 3.1 ± 7.0 kg (p = 0.028) at postoperative day 2, and 1.8 ± 6.0 kg versus 0.0 ± 6.0 kg at discharge (p = 0.002). The multivariable model including all significant (p < 0.05) demographic, fluid management–related, and surgical parameters retained postoperative day 0 fluids of >3 L (OR = 1.65 (95% CI, 1.13–2.41); p = 0.009), postoperative day 2 weight gain of >2.5 kg (OR = 1.49 (95% CI, 1.01–2.21); p = 0.048), and occurrence of postoperative complications (OR = 2.00 (95% CI, 1.39–2.90); p < 0.001) as independent risk factors for ileus. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design. Fluid management depends on patient-, disease-, and surgery-related factors and cannot be generalized and extrapolated. CONCLUSIONS: Fluid overload and occurrence of postoperative complications were independent risk factors for postoperative ileus. This calls for action to keep perioperative fluids below suggested thresholds. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B54. ASOCIACIÓN POTENCIAL ENTRE EL MANEJO DEL LÍQUIDO PERIOPERATORIO Y EL SUCESO DE ÍLEO POSTOPERATORIO ANTECEDENTES: El íleo postoperatorio sigue siendo un problema después de una cirugía colorrectal que retrasa la recuperación y aumenta la duración de la estancia hospitalaria y los costos. OBJETIVO: Analizar el impacto del manejo del líquido perioperatorio en la incidencia de íleo después de la cirugía colorrectal dentro de una vía de recuperación mejorada totalmente implementada. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de una base de datos institucional mantenida prospectivamente. MARCO: Centro académico terciario con una ruta de recuperación mejorada estandarizada completamente implementada durante todo el período del estudio. PACIENTES: Se incluyeron todas las resecciones colorrectales mayores electivas consecutivas para indicaciones benignas o malignas entre 2011 y 2016. MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES: El íleo postoperatorio se definió como la necesidad de reinserción de la sonda nasogástrica. El manejo del líquido perioperatorio y el resultado quirúrgico se compararon entre los pacientes con íleo y los que no. Los posibles factores de riesgo para el íleo se identificaron mediante regresión logística multinominal. RESULTADOS: El íleo postoperatorio se ocurrió en 377 (9%) de los 4205 pacientes incluidos al cuarto día (RIC 2-5). Intraoperatoriamente, los pacientes con íleo recibieron 3.2 ± 2.6 L de líquidos, mientras que los pacientes restantes recibieron 2.5 ± 1.7 L (p < 0.001). El aumento de peso fue de 3.8 ± 7.1 kg en pacientes con íleo versus 3 ± 6.6 kg (p = 0.272) en los pacientes restantes en el día postoperatorio 1, 4.4 ± 6.5 kg vs. 3.1 ± 7 kg (p = 0.028) en el día postoperatorio 2 y 1.8 ± 6 kg versus a 0 ± 6 kg al tiempo de alta hospitalaria (p = 0.002). El modelo multivariable que incluye todos los parámetros demográficos, del manejo de líquidos y quirúrgicos significativos (p <0.05) mantuvo líquidos del día 0 después de la operación de> 3L (proporción de probabilidad 1.65, intervalo de confianza del 95% 1.13-2.41, p = 0.009), ganancia de peso de > 2.5 kg en el dia postoperatorio 2 (proporción de probabilidad 1.49, 95% intervalo de confianza 1.01-2.21, p = 0.048) y aparición de complicaciones postoperatorias (proporción de probabilidad 2, 95% intervalo de confianza 1.39-2.9, p <0.001) como factores de riesgo independientes para íleo. LIMITACIONES: Diseño retrospectivo. El manejo de líquidos depende de factores relacionados con el paciente, la enfermedad y la cirugía, y no puede generalizarse ni extrapolarse. CONCLUSIONES: La sobrecarga de líquidos y la aparición de complicaciones postoperatorias fueron factores de riesgo independientes para el íleo postoperatorio. Esto requiere medidas para mantener los líquidos perioperatorios por debajo de los umbrales sugeridos. Vea el Video del Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B54.

AbstractBackgroundOncological outcomes of locally advanced rectal cancer depend on the quality of surgical and oncological management. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have yet to be assessed for their oncological impact when used in combination with minimally invasive surgery. This study assessed outcomes with or without an ERP in patients with rectal cancer.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of all consecutive adult patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for primary rectal adenocarcinoma with curative intent between February 2005 and April 2018. Both laparoscopic and robotic procedures were included. Short-term morbidity and overall survival were compared between patients treated according to the institutional ERP and those who received conventional care.ResultsA total of 600 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery, of whom 320 (53·3 per cent) were treated according to the ERP and 280 (46·7 per cent) received conventional care. ERP was associated with less overall morbidity (34·7 versus 54·3 per cent; P &lt; 0·001). Patients in the ERP group had improved overall survival on univariable (91·4 versus 81·7 per cent at 5 years; hazard ratio (HR) 0·53, 95 per cent c.i. 0·28 to 0·99) but not multivariable (HR 0·78, 0·41 to 1·50) analysis. Multivariable analysis revealed age (HR 1·46, 1·17 to 1·82), male sex (HR 1·98, 1·05 to 3·70) and complications (HR 2·23, 1·30 to 3·83) as independent risk factors for compromised overall survival. Disease-free survival was comparable for patients who had ERP or conventional treatment (80·5 versus 84·6 per cent at 5 years respectively; P = 0·272).ConclusionTreatment within an ERP was associated with a lower morbidity risk that may have had a subtle impact on overall but not disease-specific survival.

AbstractBackgroundThe present study aimed to assess the impact of perioperative fluid management on early acute kidney injury (AKI) rate and long‐term sequelae in patients undergoing elective colorectal procedures within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP).MethodsRetrospective analysis of consecutive patients from a prospectively maintained ERP database (2011–2015) is performed. Pre‐ and postoperative creatinine levels (within 24 h) were compared according to risk (preoperative creatinine rise ×1.5), injury (×2), failure (×3), loss of kidney function and end‐stage kidney disease (RIFLE) criteria. Risk factors for early AKI were identified through logistic regression analysis, and long‐term outcome in patients with AKI was assessed.ResultsOut of 7103 patients, 4096 patients (58%) with pre‐ and postoperative creatinine levels were included. Of these, 104 patients (2.5%) presented postoperative AKI. AKI patients received higher amounts of POD 0 fluids (3.8 ± 2.4 vs. 3.2 ± 2 L, p = 0.01) and had increased postoperative weight gain at POD 2 (6 ± 4.9 vs. 3 ± 2.7 kg, p = 0.007). Independent risk factors for AKI were high ASA score (ASA ≥ 3: OR 1.7; 95% CI 1.1–2.5), prolonged operating time (>180 min: OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.3–2.9) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5–4), while minimally invasive surgery was a protective factor (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.4–0.9). Five patients (0.1%) developed chronic kidney disease, and two of them needed dialysis after a mean follow‐up of 33.7 ± 22.4 months.ConclusionsEarly AKI was very uncommon in the present cohort of colorectal surgery patients treated within an ERP, and long‐term sequelae were exceptionally low.

AbstractAimThe present study aimed to compare functional recovery and surgical outcomes after left and right colectomies.MethodConsecutive elective left and right colon resections for benign and malignant indications, performed between 2011 and 2016 and recorded in a prospectively maintained enhanced recovery database, were analysed. Demographic and surgical items, as well as functional recovery and 30‐day complications, were compared between left‐sided and right‐sided colectomies. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify risk factors for postoperative ileus (POI).ResultsIn total, 1001 left and 1041 right colectomies were comparable regarding demographic factors; only body mass index (BMI) was higher in patients undergoing left‐sided resections (> 30 kg/m2: 33% vs 27%, P = 0.004). Malignancy (29% vs 67%, P < 0.001) and Crohn's disease (1% vs 31%, P < 0.001) were preponderant in right colectomies, whereas diverticular disease (68% vs 1%, P < 0.001) was the most common indication for left colectomy. Compliance with the enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) was comparable. While the minimally invasive approach was the preferred approach for both sides (61% vs 64%, P = 0.158), left colectomies took longer (180 ± 80 min vs 150 ± 70 min, P < 0.001), needed more perioperative fluids (3.1 ± 1.4 l vs 2.7 ± 1.5 l, P < 0.001) and resulted in greater postoperative weight gain (3.9 ± 6.5 kg vs 2.6 ± 6 kg, P = 0.025). Crohn's disease (OR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.27–5.46) and fluid overload (OR = 2.02, 95% CI: 1.06–3.82) were independent risk factors for POI.ConclusionDespite equal ERP compliance, postoperative ileus was higher after right‐sided colectomies. This finding was associated with Crohn's disease and fluid overload.

Early re-alimentation is advocated by enhanced recovery pathways (ERP). This study aimed to assess compliance to ERP-set early re-alimentation policy and to compare outcomes of early fed patients and patients in whom early feeding was withhold due to the independent decision making of the surgeon. For this purpose, demographic, surgical and outcome data of all consecutive elective colorectal surgical procedures (2011–2016) were retrieved from a prospectively maintained institutional ERP database. The primary endpoint was postoperative ileus (POI). Surgical 30-day outcome and length of stay were compared between patients undergoing the pathway-intended early re-alimentation pattern and patients in whom early re-alimentation was not compliant. Out of the 7103 patients included, 1241 (17.4%) were not compliant with ERP re-alimentation. Patients with delayed re-alimentation presented with more postoperative complications (37 vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and a prolonged length of hospital stay (8 ± 7 vs. 5 ± 4 days, p < 0.001). While male gender (odds ratio (OR) 1.24; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.04–1.32), fluid overload (OR 1.38; 95% CI 1.16–1.65) and high American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score (OR 1.51; 95% CI 1.27–1.8) were independent risk factors for POI, laparoscopy (OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.38–0.68) and ERP compliant diet (OR 0.46; 95% CI 0.36–0.6) were both protective. Hence, this study provides further evidence of the beneficial effect of early oral feeding after colorectal surgery.