Merchea, Amit

Abstract Background There is controversy regarding the postoperative outcomes in Crohn’s disease [CD] patients exposed to vedolizumab [VDZ] or ustekinumab [UST]. We aimed to describe our surgical outcomes in patients who underwent minimally invasive ileocolonic resection [MIS-ICR] for CD who had preoperative biologic therapy. Methods All consecutive adult patients who had MIS-ICR for CD between 2014 and 2021 at our institution were included. Patients were divided into four groups: VDZ, UST, anti-tumour necrosis factor [anti-TNF], and no biologic group. Timing between the last dose of biologics and surgery was per surgeon’s discretion. The primary outcome was intra-abdominal septic complications. Secondary outcomes included all 30-day complications. Results A total of 274 patients were identified. Of these, 113 [41.2%] patients had received anti-TNF, 52 [19%] had received UST, and 19 [7%] had received VDZ. There was no difference between the four groups regarding baseline risk factors. There was no difference between the four groups regarding intra-abdominal septic complications [4.4% for no biologic, 5.3% for anti-TNF, 5.8% for UST, and 5.3% for VDZ; p = 0.987], surgical site infection rate, overall 30-day morbidity, overall 30-day readmission, overall surgical and medical complications, urinary tract infection, pulmonary infections, or length of stay. Those results were consistent after a subgroup analysis based on complexity of the disease. Conclusions This retrospective analysis demonstrates an equivalent postoperative safety profile for patients treated with preoperative anti-TNF, VDZ, or UST versus no biologic therapy within 3 months of MIS-ICR for Crohn’s disease. Preoperative biologic therapy may not increase complications after minimally invasive ileocolonic resection in Crohn’s disease. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm results.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative frozen-section analysis provides real-time margin resection status that can guide intraoperative decisions made by the surgeon and radiation oncologist. For patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy, intraoperative re-resection of positive margins to achieve negative margins is common practice. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether re-resection of positive margins found on intraoperative frozen-section analysis improves oncologic outcomes. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was an analysis of a prospectively maintained multicenter database. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent surgical resection of locally recurrent rectal cancer with intraoperative radiation therapy between 2000 and 2015 were included and followed for 5 years. Three groups were compared: initial R0 resection, initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection. Grossly positive margin resections (R2) were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were 5-year overall survival, recurrence-free survival, and local re-recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 267 patients were analyzed (initial R0 resection, n = 94; initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, n = 95; initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection, n = 78). Overall survival was 4.4 years for initial R0 resection, 2.7 years for initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection, and 2.9 years for initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection (p = 0.01). Recurrence-free survival was 3.0 years for initial R0 resection and 1.8 years for both initial R1 converted to R0 after re-resection and initial R1 that remained R1 after re-resection (p ≤ 0.01). Overall survival did not differ for patients with R1 and re-resection R1 or R0 (p = 0.62). Recurrence-free survival and freedom from local re-recurrence did not differ between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the heterogeneous patient population restricted to those receiving intraoperative radiation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Re-resection of microscopically positive margins to obtain R0 status does not appear to provide a significant survival advantage or prevent local re-recurrence in patients undergoing surgery and intraoperative radiation therapy for locally recurrent rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886. LA RE-RESECCIÓN DE LOS MÁRGENES MICROSCÓPICAMENTE POSITIVOS ENCONTRADOS DE MANERA INTRAOPERATORIA MEDIANTE LA TÉCNICA DE CRIOSECCIÓN, NO DA COMO RESULTADO UN BENEFICIO DE SUPERVIVENCIA EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGÍA Y RADIOTERAPIA INTRAOPERATORIA PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE ANTECEDENTES: El análisis de la ténica de criosección para los margenes positivos encontrados de manera intraoperatoria proporciona el estado de la resección del margen en tiempo real que puede guiar las decisiones intraoperatorias tomadas por el cirujano y el oncólogo radioterapeuta. Para los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se someten a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria, la re-resección intraoperatoria de los márgenes positivos para lograr márgenes negativos es una práctica común. OBJETIVO: Evaluar si la re-resección de los márgenes positivos encontrados en el análisis de la ténica por criosecciónde manera intraoperatorios mejora los resultados oncológicos. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. AJUSTES: Análisis de una base de datos multicéntrica mantenida de forma prospectiva. POBLACIÓN: Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resección quirúrgica de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente con radioterapia intraoperatoria entre 2000 y 2015 fueron incluidos y seguidos durante 5 años. Se compararon tres grupos: resección inicial R0, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección. Se excluyeron las resecciones de márgenes macroscópicamente positivos (R2). PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Supervivencia global a cinco años, supervivencia sin recidiva y recidiva local. RESULTADOS: Se analizaron un total de 267 pacientes (resección inicial R0 n = 94, R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección n = 95, R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección n = 78). La supervivencia global fue de 4,4 años para la resección inicial R0, 2,7 años para la R1 inicial convertida en R0 después de la re-resección y 2,9 años para la R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección (p = 0,01). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue de 3,0 años para la resección inicial R0 y de 1,8 años para el R1 inicial convertido en R0 después de la re-resección y el R1 inicial que permaneció como R1 después de la re-resección (p ≤ 0,01). La supervivencia global no difirió para los pacientes con R1 y re-resección R1 o R0 (p = 0,62). La supervivencia libre de recurrencia y la ausencia de recurrencia local no difirieron entre los grupos. LIMITACIONES: Población de pacientes heterogénea, restringida a aquellos que reciben radioterapia intraoperatoria. CONCLUSIONES: La re-resección de los márgenes microscópicamente positivos para obtener el estado R0 no parece proporcionar una ventaja de supervivencia significativa o prevenir la recurrencia local en pacientes sometidos a cirugía y radioterapia intraoperatoria para el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B886. (Traducción—Dr. Daniel Guerra)

Abstract Aim The aim of this study was to describe the surgical management, outcomes and risk of malignancy of presacral tailgut cysts. Method A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent resection of tailgut cyst at Mayo Clinic in Arizona, Florida and Minnesota between 2008 and 2020 was performed. Demographics, presentation, evaluation, surgical approach, postoperative complications, pathology and recurrence rates were reviewed. Results Seventy‐three patients were identified (81% female) with a mean age of 45 years. Thirty‐nine patients (53%) were symptomatic, most commonly with pelvic pain (26 patients). Digital rectal examination identified a palpable mass in 68%. Mean tumour size was 6 cm. Resection was primarily performed through a posterior approach (77%, n = 56), followed by a transabdominal approach (18%, n = 13) and a combined approach (5%, n = 4). Six patients underwent a minimally invasive resection (laparoscopic/robotic). Coccygectomy or distal sacrectomy was performed in 41 patients (56%). Complete resection was achieved in 94% of patients. Thirty‐day morbidity occurred in 18% and was most commonly wound related; there was no mortality. Malignancy was identified in six patients (8%). For the 30 patients with follow‐up greater than 1 year, the median follow‐up was 39 months (range 1.0–11.1 years). Local recurrence was identified in three patients and distant metastatic disease in one patient. Conclusion The rate of malignancy in presacral tailgut cysts based on this current review was 8%. Overall recurrence was 5% at a median of 24 months.

AbstractAimThe existing literature was updated, assessing the use of surgery in patients with ulcerative colitis in more recent years.MethodsThis was a retrospective observational study identifying all patients with ulcerative colitis within the National Inpatient Sample, years 2009–2018. All patients with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revisions, Clinical Modification diagnostic codes for ulcerative colitis were included. The primary outcome was the trend in total number of total abdominal colectomy, proctocolectomy and simultaneous versus delayed pouch construction.ResultsA total of 1 184 711 ulcerative‐colitis‐related admissions were identified. An increase of 18.6% in the number of patients was observed, while the number of surgeries decreased. A total of 40 499 patients underwent total colectomy, annually decreasing from 5241 to 3185. The number of proctocolectomies without pouch decreased from 1191 to 530, while the number of patients undergoing pouch construction decreased from 2225 to 1284. The proportion of patients undergoing initial pouch at time of proctocolectomy decreased from 995 (45%) to 265 (21%), while the proportion of patients undergoing delayed pouch construction in 2018 was 79% (n = 1120).ConclusionSurgery use in ulcerative colitis has decreased in the last decade despite increasing numbers of hospital admissions in patients with this condition. While the overall proportion of patients undergoing pouch construction remained stable, the majority of patients were initially treated with total colectomy and their ileal pouches werre constructed in a delayed fashion.

AbstractIleocolic resection (ICR) is the most common surgical procedure in Crohn disease (CD). There are many surgical techniques for performing ICRs and subsequent anastomoses. Recurrence of CD after ICR is common, often clinically silent, and thus requires monitoring including periodic use of endoscopy to detect early active disease. There is emerging evidence that surgical approaches may influence CD recurrence. This review explores the various surgical considerations, the data behind each decision, and how these techniques influence subsequent endoscopic surveillance.

AbstractBackgroundTo evaluate the economic burden of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) treatment from a society perspective through analysis of health insurance‐derived data of commercially insured and Medicare Advantage (MA) patients.MethodsRetrospective cost analysis of patients undergoing rectal resection within a multimodal (neoadjuvant chemoradiation + adjuvant chemotherapy) treatment strategy between January 1, 2010 and October 31, 2018, using the claims OptumLabs Data Warehouse database.ResultsIn total, 1738 (935 commercial and 803 MA) patients were included. Overall treatment costs totaled $230,881,746 (on average $183 653 ± 82 384 per commercially insured and $73 681 ± 32 917 per MA patient). Cost distribution according to category (commercially insured patients) was: 29.92% related to outpatient care (follow‐up visits/diagnostics), radiotherapy: 21.83%, index resection: 20.62%, chemotherapy: 17.44%, surgical inpatient: 6.32%, medical inpatient: 3.28%, emergency room: 0.58%. Relative cost distribution of the index resection itself differed marginally between the three approaches and was 21.49% for open, 19.30% for laparoscopic, and 20.93% for robotic surgery. Relative cost distributions of neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and outpatient treatments remained unchanged, independently of the surgical approach. This representation was similar in MA patients.ConclusionIndex‐surgery related costs were outweighed by costs related to oncological and outpatient workup/follow‐up treatments independently of both surgical approach and insurance type.

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: Peritoneal metastases arise in patients with a variety of primary cancers, and are associated with a poor prognosis. Systemic chemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment; however, the morbidity is considerable and the survival benefit is modest. Cytoreductive surgery and heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy is a potentially curative treatment available to a minority of patients; however, most develop recurrent disease. A novel palliative treatment for peritoneal metastases, pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy, has recently been introduced. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy utilizes an aerosol of chemotherapy in carbon dioxide gas. It is instilled into the abdomen under pressure via laparoscopic ports. No cytoreduction is performed. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy can be repeated at 6-week intervals. Oxaliplatin or cis-platinum and doxorubicin have been used to date. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to systematically review and evaluate the method, and the preclinical and early clinical results of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy. DATA SOURCES: Medline and the Cochrane Library were the data sources for the study. STUDY SELECTION: Peer-reviewed series of greater than 10 patients, with sufficient patient data, through April 2019, were selected. INTERVENTION: Patients with peritoneal metastases underwent pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient dropout, histologic tumor response, adverse events, and 30-day mortality were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: A total of 921 patients with peritoneal metastases were brought to the operating room for pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy. The number of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy treatments administered was as follows: 1 treatment, 862 (94%); 2 treatments, 645 (70%); and 3 treatments, 390 patients (42%). Initial laparoscopic access was not possible in 59 patients (6.4%). Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3 or higher were noted in 13.7% of the patients who, collectively, underwent a total of 2116 treatments. The 30-day mortality was 2.4% (22/921). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the heterogeneity of reported data and primary tumor types and by the lack of long-term survival data. CONCLUSIONS: Early clinical results are encouraging, but tumor-specific, prospective, randomized trials are needed to compare pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy to systemic chemotherapy. This method has yet to be introduced to the United States. It is another therapeutic option for patients with peritoneal metastases and will broaden the patient base for future clinical trials.