Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left-sided colorectal resection

Catalysing global surgery: a meta-research study on factors affecting surgical research collaborations with Africa

INTRODUCTION

In December 2019, the COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgent need for rapid collaboration, research, and interventions. International research collaborations foster more significant responses to rapid global changes by enabling international, multicentre research, decreasing biases, and increasing study validity while reducing overall research time and costs. However, there has been low uptake of collaborative research by African institutions and individuals.

AIM

To systematically review facilitating factors and challenges to collaborative surgical research studies conducted in Africa.

METHODOLOGY

A meta-research review using PubMed®/MEDLINE and Embase on surgical collaboration in Africa from 1st of January 2011 to 31st of September 2021 in accordance to PRISMA guidelines. Surgical studies by collaborative groups involving African authors and sites were included (55 papers). Data on the study period, geographical regions, and research scope, facilitating factors, and challenges were extracted from the studies retrieved from the search.

RESULTS

Most of the collaborations in Africa occurred with European institutions (76%). Of the 54 African countries, 63% (34/54) participated in surgical collaborations. The highest collaboration frequency occurred in South Africa (11%) and Nigeria (8%). However, most publications originated from Eastern Africa (43%). Leveraging synergies between high- and low- to middle-income countries (LMICs), well-defined structures, and secure data platforms facilitated collaboration. However, the underrepresentation of collaborators from LMICs was a significant challenge.

CONCLUSION

Available literature provides critical insights into the facilitating factors and challenges of research collaboration with Africa. However, there is a need for a detailed prospective study to explore the themes highlighted further.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO 2022 CRD42022352115 .

Stoma-free Survival After Rectal Cancer Resection With Anastomotic Leakage: Development and Validation of a Prediction Model in a Large International Cohort

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a prediction model (STOMA score) for 1-year stoma-free survival in patients with rectal cancer (RC) with anastomotic leakage (AL).

BACKGROUND

AL after RC resection often results in a permanent stoma.

METHODS

This international retrospective cohort study (TENTACLE-Rectum) encompassed 216 participating centres and included patients who developed AL after RC surgery between 2014 and 2018. Clinically relevant predictors for 1-year stoma-free survival were included in uni and multivariable logistic regression models. The STOMA score was developed and internally validated in a cohort of patients operated between 2014 and 2017, with subsequent temporal validation in a 2018 cohort. The discriminative power and calibration of the models' performance were evaluated.

RESULTS

This study included 2499 patients with AL, 1954 in the development cohort and 545 in the validation cohort. Baseline characteristics were comparable. One-year stoma-free survival was 45.0% in the development cohort and 43.7% in the validation cohort. The following predictors were included in the STOMA score: sex, age, American Society of Anestesiologist classification, body mass index, clinical M-disease, neoadjuvant therapy, abdominal and transanal approach, primary defunctioning stoma, multivisceral resection, clinical setting in which AL was diagnosed, postoperative day of AL diagnosis, abdominal contamination, anastomotic defect circumference, bowel wall ischemia, anastomotic fistula, retraction, and reactivation leakage. The STOMA score showed good discrimination and calibration (c-index: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.66-0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

The STOMA score consists of 18 clinically relevant factors and estimates the individual risk for 1-year stoma-free survival in patients with AL after RC surgery, which may improve patient counseling and give guidance when analyzing the efficacy of different treatment strategies in future studies.

Colorectal Surgery Practice, Training, and Research in Low-Resource Settings

Colorectal surgery (CRS) practice, training, and research differ between low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and high-income countries due to disparity in resources. LMIC CRS is primarily done by general surgeons due to the paucity of fully trained colorectal surgeons. The majority of colon and rectal resections are done using open techniques, and laparoscopy and robotic platforms are only available in select private or academic centers. Multi-disciplinary teams are not available in most hospitals, so surgeons must have a broad knowledge base, and learn to adapt their practice. Formal CRS training opportunities through accredited post-residency fellowships and professional colorectal surgical associations are limited in LMICs. CRS is less established as an academic field, and less data are generated in LMICs. There are fewer staff and less dedicated funding for CRS research. However, LMIC colorectal surgeons and researchers can contribute valuable clinical findings especially on conditions of higher prevalence in their settings such as anal squamous cell carcinoma and obstetric fistulas. Effective surgical care for colorectal conditions requires significant investment in infrastructure, training, and governance in LMICs. This is critical to improve access to safe surgical care for all.

Short and long-term outcomes of elderly patients undergoing left-sided colorectal resection with primary anastomosis for cancer

BACKGROUND

The proportion of elderly colorectal cancer (CRC) patients requiring surgery is increasing. Colorectal resection for left-sided cancers is the most controversial as the primary anastomosis or end-colostomy and open or minimally invasive approaches are available. Therefore, this study was conducted to investigate the short- and long-term outcomes in elderly patients after resection with primary anastomosis for left-sided CRC.

METHODS

The cohort study included left-sided colorectal cancer patients who underwent resection with primary anastomosis. The participants were divided into non-elderly (≤75 years) and elderly (> 75 years) groups. Short- and long-term postoperative outcomes were investigated.

RESULTS

In total 738 (82%) and 162 (18%) patients were allocated to non-elderly and elderly groups, respectively. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) was less prevalent in the elderly (42.6% vs 52.7%, p = 0.024) and a higher proportion of these suffered severe or lethal complications (15.4% vs 9.8%, p = 0.040). MIS decreased the odds for postoperative complications (OR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.19-0.89, p = 0.038). The rate of anastomotic leakage was similar (8.5% vs 11.7%, p = 0.201), although, in the case of leakage 21.1% of elderly patients died within 90-days after surgery. Overall- and disease-free survival was impaired in the elderly. MIS increased the odds for long-term survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients suffer more severe complications after resection with primary anastomosis for left-sided CRC. The risk of anastomotic leakage in the elderly and non-elderly is similar, although, leakages in the elderly seem to be associated with a higher 90-day mortality rate. Minimally invasive surgery is associated with decreased morbidity in the elderly.

Study protocol for COvid-19 Vascular sERvice (COVER) study: The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the provision, practice and outcomes of vascular surgery

BACKGROUND

The novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is having a profound impact on global healthcare. Shortages in staff, operating theatre space and intensive care beds has led to a significant reduction in the provision of surgical care. Even vascular surgery, often insulated from resource scarcity due to its status as an urgent specialty, has limited capacity due to the pandemic. Furthermore, many vascular surgical patients are elderly with multiple comorbidities putting them at increased risk of COVID-19 and its complications. There is an urgent need to investigate the impact on patients presenting to vascular surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The COvid-19 Vascular sERvice (COVER) study has been designed to investigate the worldwide impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on vascular surgery, at both service provision and individual patient level. COVER is running as a collaborative study through the Vascular and Endovascular Research Network (VERN), an independent, international vascular research collaborative with the support of numerous national and international organisations). The study has 3 'Tiers': Tier 1 is a survey of vascular surgeons to capture longitudinal changes to the provision of vascular services within their hospital; Tier 2 captures data on vascular and endovascular procedures performed during the pandemic; and Tier 3 will capture any deviations to patient management strategies from pre-pandemic best practice. Data submission and collection will be electronic using online survey tools (Tier 1: SurveyMonkey® for service provision data) and encrypted data capture forms (Tiers 2 and 3: REDCap® for patient level data). Tier 1 data will undergo real-time serial analysis to determine longitudinal changes in practice, with country-specific analyses also performed. The analysis of Tier 2 and Tier 3 data will occur on completion of the study as per the pre-specified statistical analysis plan.

Growing research in geriatric medicine: a trainee perspective

Growing research in geriatric medicine is a priority area. Currently, involvement of geriatricians in research lags behind other specialties. The reasons for this are multifactorial, but a lack of training infrastructure within geriatric medicine higher specialist training is contributory. This is widespread across European countries and internationally. The Geriatric Medicine Research Collaborative (GeMRC) offers an opportunity to engage trainees in research, regardless of their previous individual research experiences. Utilising national trainee networks, GeMRC is able to conduct large-scale projects within short periods of time that can have real impact upon patient care. We consider that embedding GeMRC within higher specialist training with formal college support will assist to upskill trainee geriatricians in research methodology. Collaboratives are internationally recognised across disciplines. Expansion across European and international countries offers the opportunity for international collaboration in geriatric medicine. International trainee-led networks will enable the conduct of large-scale global projects in geriatric medicine.

Perioperative mortality as a meaningful indicator: Challenges and solutions for measurement, interpretation, and health system improvement

Expanding global access to safe surgical and anaesthesia care is crucial to meet the health targets of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). As global surgical volume increases, improving safety throughout the patient care pathway is a public health priority. At present, an estimated 4.2 million individuals die within 30 days of surgery each year, and many of these deaths are preventable. Important considerations for the collection and reporting of perioperative mortality data have been identified in the literature, but consensus has not been established on the best methodology for the quantification of excess surgical mortality at a hospital or health system level. In this narrative review, we address challenges in the use of perioperative mortality rates (POMR) for improving patient safety. First, we discuss controversies in the use of POMR as a health system indicator and suggest advantages for using a "basket" of procedure-specific mortality rates as an adjunct to gross POMR. We offer then solutions to challenges in the collection and reporting of POMR data, and propose interventions for improving care in the preoperative, operative, and postoperative periods. Finally, we discuss how health systems leaders and frontline clinicians can integrate surgical safety into both national health plans and patient care pathways to drive a sustainable safety revolution in perioperative care.

Preventive strategies for anastomotic leakage after colorectal resections: A review

Anastomosis is a crucial step in radical cancer surgery. Despite being a daily practice in gastrointestinal surgery, anastomotic leakage (AL) stands as a frequent postoperative complication. Because of increased morbidity, mortality, combined with longer hospital stay, the rate of re-intervention, and poor oncological outcomes, AL is considered the most feared and life-threatening complication after colorectal resections. Furthermore, poor functional outcomes with a higher rate of a permeant stoma in 56% of patients this could negatively affect the patient’s quality of life. This a narrative review which will cover intraoperative anastomotic integrity assessment and preventive measures in order to reduce AL. Although the most important prerequisites for the creation of anastomosis is well-perfused and tension-free anastomosis, surgeons have proposed several preventive measures, which were assumed to reduce the incidence of AL, including antibiotic prophylaxis, intraoperative air leak test, omental pedicle flap, defunctioning stoma, pelvic drain insertion, stapled anastomosis, and general surgical technique. However, lack of clear evidence of which preventive measures is superior over the other combined with the fact that the decision remains based on the surgeon’s choice. Despite the advances in surgical techniques, AL remains a serious health problem associated with increased morbidity, mortality with additional cost. Many preventative measures were employed with no clear evidence supporting the superiority of stapled anastomosis over hand-Sewn anastomosis, coating of the anastomosis, or pelvic drain. Defunctioning stoma, when justified it could decrease the leakage-related complications and the incidence of reoperation. MBP combined with oral antibiotics still recommended.