Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in minimally invasive right colectomy: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive colectomy has become the standard for treatment of colonic disease in many centers. Restoration of bowel continuity following resection can be achieved by intracorporeal (IC) or extracorporeal (EC) anastomosis. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the outcomes of IC compared to EC anastomosis in minimally invasive right colectomy.

METHODS

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-compliant systematic literature search for studies assessing the outcome of IC and EC anastomosis in laparoscopic and robot-assisted right colectomy was conducted. The primary outcome of this review was postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included operative time, blood loss, length of stay, conversion to open surgery, and bowel recovery.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies including 4450 patients were evaluated. 47.7% of patients had IC anastomosis and 52.3% had EC anastomosis. The weighted mean length of extraction site incision in the IC group was shorter than the EC group. The EC group had significantly higher odds of conversion to open surgery (OR 1.87, 95% CI 1-3.45, p = 0.046), total complications (OR 1.54, 95% CI 1.05-2.11, p = 0.007), anastomotic leakage (AL) (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.4-2.7, p = 0.003), surgical site infection (SSI) (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.4-2.6, p = 0.002), and incisional hernia (OR 3.14, 95% CI 1.85-5.33, p < 0.001) compared to the IC group. Both groups had similar rates of ileus, small bowel obstruction, bleeding, and intra-abdominal infection.

CONCLUSION

IC anastomosis was associated with significantly shorter extraction site incisions, earlier bowel recovery, fewer complications, and lower rates of conversion, AL, SSI, and incisional hernia than has the EC anastomosis.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the safety and efficacy of fistula laser closure

BACKGROUND

Fistula laser closure (FiLaC) is a novel sphincter-saving technique for the treatment of fistula-in-ano. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of the FiLaC procedure.

METHODS

Databases including PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, and Embase were searched for articles assessing FiLaC. All studies including case series and comparative studies reporting the outcome of FiLaC in the treatment of fistula-in-ano were considered eligible. The main outcomes were healing rates of fistula laser closure, postoperative complications including incontinence, technical aspects of the procedure and failure of healing.

RESULTS

Seven studies were included. There were a total of 454 patients, 69.1% with a transsphincteric fistula-in-ano and 35% with recurrent disease. The median age of the patients was 43 years (range 18-83 years). The median operation time was 18.3 min (range 6-32 min). With a median follow-up of 23.7 months, the weighed mean rate of primary healing was 67.3% and the overall success when FiLaC was reused was 69.7%. The weighted mean rate of complications was 4%, all of them were minor complications and the weighted mean rate of continence affection was 1% in the form of minor soiling.

CONCLUSIONS

FiLaC may be considered an effective and safe sphincter-saving technique for the treatment of fistula-in-ano with an acceptable, low, complication rate. However, well-designed randomized control trials comparing FiLaC with other techniques are required to substantiate the promising outcomes reported in this review.

Perineal resectional procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse: A systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Several procedures for the treatment of complete rectal prolapse (CRP) exist. These procedures are performed via the abdominal or perineal approach. Perineal procedures for rectal prolapse involve either resection or suspension and fixation of the rectum. The present review aimed to assess the outcomes of the perineal resectional procedures including Altemeier procedure (AP), Delorme procedure (DP), and perineal stapled prolapse resection (PSR) in the treatment of CRP.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the current literature for the outcomes of perineal resectional procedures for CRP was conducted. Databases queried included PubMed/MEDLINE, SCOPUS, and Cochrane library. The main outcomes of the review were the rates of recurrence of CRP, improvement in bowel function, and complications.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine studies involving 2647 (2390 females) patients were included in the review. The mean age of patients was 69.1 years. Recurrence of CRP occurred in 16.6% of patients. The median incidences of recurrence were 11.4% for AP, 14.4% for DP, and 13.9% for PSR. Improvement in fecal incontinence occurred in 61.4% of patients after AP, 69% after DP, and 23.5% after PSR. Complications occurred in 13.2% of patients. The median complication rates after AP, DP and PSR were 11.1%, 8.7%, and 11.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Perineal resectional procedures were followed by a relatively high incidence of recurrence, yet an acceptably low complication rate. Definitive conclusions on the superiority of any procedure cannot be reached due to the significant heterogeneity of the studies.

Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) versus stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) in treatment of internal hemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Although conventional hemorrhoidectomy proved effective in treatment of hemorrhoidal disease, postoperative pain remains a vexing problem. Alternatives to conventional hemorrhoidectomy as transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) and stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) were described. The present meta-analysis aimed to review the randomized trials that compared THD and SH to determine which technique is superior in terms of recurrence of hemorrhoids, complications, and postoperative pain.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized trials that compared THD and SH for internal hemorrhoids. The PRISMA guidelines were followed when reporting this meta-analysis. The primary endpoint of the analysis was persistence or recurrence of hemorrhoidal disease. Secondary endpoints were postoperative pain, complications, readmission, return to work, and patients' satisfaction.

RESULTS

Six randomized trials including 554 patients (THD = 280; SH = 274) were included. The mean postoperative pain score of THD was significantly lower than SH (2.9 ± 1.5 versus 3.3 ± 1.6). 13.2% of patients experienced persistent or recurrent hemorrhoids after THD versus 6.9% after SH (OR = 1.93, 95%CI = 1.07-3.51, p = 0.029). Complications were recorded in 17.1% of patients who underwent THD and 23.3% of patients who underwent SH (OR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.43-1.05, p = 0.08). The average duration to return to work after THD was 7.3 ± 5.2 versus 7.7 ± 4.8 days after SH (p = 0.34). Grade IV hemorrhoids was significantly associated with persistence or recurrence of hemorrhoidal disease after both procedures.

CONCLUSION

THD had significantly higher persistence/recurrence rate compared to SH whereas complication and readmission rates, hospital stay, return to work, and patients' satisfaction were similar in both groups.

Does the duration of symptoms of anal fissure impact its response to conservative treatment? A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Conservative treatment is the first line of treatment for anal fissure. The current study aimed to evaluate the impact of symptom duration on the response of anal fissure to conservative treatment.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study was conducted on sixty patients with acute or chronic anal fissure who were treated conservatively with bulking agents, Sitz baths, and topical glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) 0.2%. Pain and constipation were assessed prior to treatment and at 6 weeks after therapy using visual analogue scale (VAS) and Wexner constipation score. Adverse effects as headache and postural hypotension were also queried.

RESULTS

The mean pre-treatment VAS for acute fissure was significantly higher than chronic fissure (8.8 ± 0.96 Vs 5.8 ± 1.12), also the post-treatment VAS for acute fissure was significantly lower at 6 weeks of treatment (0.47 ± 0.8 Vs 2.5 ± 1.3). The baseline Wexner constipation score was comparable in both groups; however, at six weeks of treatment it declined more significantly in patients with acute fissure. Patients with acute fissure achieved significantly better healing than chronic fissure (80% Vs 40%). Healing rates decreased from 100% in patients with symptoms < one month to 33.3% in patients with symptoms >6 months.

CONCLUSION

Conservative treatment including topical GTN 0.2% significantly hastened healing and relieved pain and other symptoms of acute more than chronic anal fissure. Healing rates of anal fissure in response to conservative treatment showed remarkable decrease in proportion to the duration of complaint.

Efficacy and Safety of Non-Operative Management of Uncomplicated Acute Appendicitis Compared to Appendectomy: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

BACKGROUND

Non-operative management (NOM) of uncomplicated acute appendicitis (AA) has been introduced as an alternative to appendectomy. This umbrella review aimed to provide an overview of the efficacy and safety of NOM of uncomplicated AA in the published systematic reviews.

METHODS

This umbrella review has been reported in line with the PRISMA guidelines and umbrella review approach. Systematic reviews with and without meta-analyses on the efficacy of NOM of AA were analyzed. The quality of the reviews was assessed with the AMSTAR 2 tool. The main outcomes measures were the treatment failure and complication rates of NOM and hospital stay as compared to appendectomy.

RESULTS

Eighteen systematic reviews were included to this umbrella review. Eight reviews documented higher odds of failure with NOM, whereas two reviews revealed similar odds of failure. Six reviews reported lower odds of complications with NOM, six reported similar odds, and one reported lower odds of complications with surgery. Eight reviews reported similar hospital stay between NOM and appendectomy, one reported longer stay with NOM and another reported shorter stay with NOM. Pooled analyses showed that NOM was associated with higher treatment failure overall, in children-only, adults only, and RCTs-only meta-analyses. NOM was associated with lower complications overall, yet children-only and RCTs-only analyses revealed similar complications to surgery. NOM was associated with shorter stay in the overall and adult-only analysis, but not in the children-only analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

NOM of AA is associated with higher treatment failure, marginally lower rate of complications and shorter stay than appendectomy.

Indications for and outcome of primary repair compared with faecal diversion in the management of traumatic colon injury

AIM

Injuries of the colon are a serious sequel of abdominal trauma owing to the associated morbidity and mortality. This study aims to assess postoperative outcome and complications of faecal diversion and primary repair of colon injuries when applied according to established guidelines for the management of colon injuries.

METHOD

This retrospective study was conducted on 110 patients with colon injuries. Guided by estimation of risk factors, patients were managed either by primary repair alone, repair with proximal diversion or diversion alone.

RESULTS

There were 102 (92.7%) male patients and 8 (7.3%) female patients of median age 38 years. Thirty-seven were managed by primary repair and 73 by faecal diversion. Colon injuries were caused by penetrating abdominal trauma in 65 and blunt trauma in 45 patients. Forty-three patients were in shock on admission, and were all managed by faecal diversion. Forty patients developed 84 complications after surgery. Primary repair had a significantly lower complication rate than faecal diversion (P = 0.037). Wound infection was the commonest complication. The overall mortality rate was 3.6%.

CONCLUSION

Primary repair, when employed properly, resulted in a significantly lower complication rate than faecal diversion. Significant predictive factors associated with a higher complication rate were faecal diversion, severe faecal contamination, multiple colon injuries, an interval of more than 12 h after colon injury and shock.

Patient and healthcare professional perceptions of colostomy-related problems and their impact on quality of life following rectal cancer surgery

Background

The perception of colostomy‐related problems and their impact on health‐related quality of life (QoL) may differ between patients and healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to investigate this using the Colostomy Impact Score (CIS) tool.

Methods

Healthcare professionals including consultant colorectal surgeons, stoma nurses, ward nurses, trainees and medical students were recruited. An online survey was designed. From the 17 items used to develop the CIS, participants chose the seven factors they thought to confer the strongest negative impact on the QoL of patients with a colostomy. They were then asked to rank the 12 responses made by patients to the final seven factors contained in the CIS. Results were compared with the original patient rankings at the time of development of the CIS.

Results

A total of 156 healthcare professionals (50·4 per cent of the pooled professionals) from 17 countries completed the survey. Of the original seven items in the CIS, six were above the threshold for random selection. Ranking the responses, a poor match between participants and the original score was detected for 49·7 per cent of the professionals. The most under‐rated item originally present in the CIS was stool consistency, reported by 47 of the 156 professionals (30·1 per cent), whereas frequency of changing the stoma bag was the item not included in the CIS that was chosen most often by professionals (124, 79·5 per cent). Significant differences were not observed between different groups of professionals.

Conclusion

The perspective of colostomy‐related problems differs between patients with a colostomy and healthcare professionals.

Comparative Study Between Trans-perineal Repair With or Without Limited Internal Sphincterotomy in the Treatment of Type I Anterior Rectocele: a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Two types of rectocele exist; type I is characterized by relatively high resting anal pressures, whereas type II has lower resting anal pressures with associated pelvic organ prolapse. We compared trans-perineal repair (TPR) of rectocele with or without limited internal sphincterotomy (LIS) in the treatment of type I anterior rectocele.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS

Consecutive patients with anterior rectocele were evaluated for inclusion. Sixty-two female patients with type I anterior rectocele were randomized and equally allocated to receive TPR alone (group I) or TPR with LIS (group II). The primary outcome was the clinical improvement of constipation. Secondary outcomes were recurrence of rectocele, operative time, and postoperative complications including fecal incontinence (FI).

RESULTS

Clinical improvement of constipation and patients' satisfaction were significantly higher in group II at 1 year of follow-up (93.3 versus 70 %). Constipation scores significantly decreased in both groups postoperatively with more reduction being observed in group II (11.1 ± 2.1 in group I versus 8 ± 1.97 in group II). Significant reduction in the resting anal pressure was noticed in group II. Recurrence was recorded in three (10 %) patients of group I and one patient of group II. No significant differences between the two groups regarding the operative time and hospital stay were noted.

CONCLUSION

Adding LIS to TPR of type I rectocele achieved better clinical improvement than TPR alone. The only drawback of LIS was the development of a minor degree of FI, which was temporary in duration.

Ultrasound-guided versus laparoscopic-guided subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block versus No TAP block in laparoscopic cholecystectomy; a randomized double-blind controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is an effective modality for the control of immediate postoperative pain. The present randomized trial aimed to assess the efficacy of ultrasound-guided subcostal TAP (USTAP) and laparoscopic subcostal TAP (LSTAP) block as compared to standard care without TAP block after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

METHODS

This was a prospective, randomized, controlled trial on patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients were equally randomized to one of three groups: USTAP, LSTAP, and control group (no TAP block). The main outcome measures were pain scores and analgesic consumption within the first 24 h postoperatively, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), time to ambulation, time to first flatus, and adverse effects of TAP block.

RESULTS

The trial included 110 patients (90% females) with a mean age of 40.9 ± 11.7 years. Both USTAP and LSTAP block groups were associated with significantly lower pain scores at 2, 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively, lower cumulative dose of paracetamol, less PONV, and shorter time to flatus than the control group. USTAP and LSTAP block were associated with similar pain scores at all time points, similar analgesic requirements, a similar incidence of PONV, and comparable time to first ambulation and time to first flatus. No adverse effects related to TAP block were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

TAP block is a safe and effective method for pain control and improving recovery after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Both USTAP and LSTAP blocks were equally effective in terms of pain relief, analgesic requirements, PONV, return of bowel function, and time to ambulation.