Search

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: To evaluate whether systematic mesh implantation upon primary colostomy creation was effective to prevent PSH. Summary of Background Data: Previous randomized trials on prevention of PSH by mesh placement have shown contradictory results. Methods: This was a prospective, randomized controlled trial in 18 hospitals in France on patients aged ≥18 receiving a first colostomy for an indication other than infection. Participants were randomized by blocks of random size, stratified by center in a 1:1 ratio to colostomy with or without a synthetic, lightweight monofilament mesh. Patients and outcome assessors were blinded to patient group. The primary endpoint was clinically diagnosed PSH rate at 24 months of the intention-to-treat population. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01380860. Results: From November 2012 to October 2016, 200 patients were enrolled. Finally, 65 patients remained in the no mesh group (Group A) and 70 in the mesh group (Group B) at 24 months with the most common reason for drop-out being death (n = 41). At 24 months, PSH was clinically detected in 28 patients (28%) in Group A and 30 (31%) in Group B [ P = 0.77, odds ratio = 1.15 95% confidence interval = (0.62;2.13)]. Stoma-related complications were reported in 32 Group A patients and 37 Group B patients, but no mesh infections. There were no deaths related to mesh insertion. Conclusion: We failed to show efficiency of a prophylactic mesh on PSH rate. Placement of a mesh in a retro-muscular position with a central incision to allow colon passage cannot be recommended to prevent PSH. Optimization of mesh location and reinforcement material should be performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text Objective: To report the largest multicentric experience on surgical management of retrorectal tumors (RRT). Background: Literature data on RRT is limited. There is no consensus concerning the best surgical approach for the management of RRT. Methods: Patients operated for RRT in 18 academic French centers were retrospectively included (2000–2019). Results: A total of 270 patients were included. Surgery was performed through abdominal (n = 72, 27%), bottom (n = 190, 70%), or combined approach (n = 8, 3%). Abdominal approach was laparoscopic in 53/72 (74%) and bottom approach was Kraske modified procedures in 169/190 (89%) patients. In laparoscopic abdominal group, tumors were more frequently symptomatic (37/53, 70% vs 88/169, 52%, P = 0.02), larger [mean diameter = 60.5 ± 24 (range, 13–107) vs 51 ± 26 (20–105) mm, P = 0.02] and located above S3 vertebra (n = 3/42, 7% vs 0%, P = 0.001) than those from Kraske modified group. Laparoscopy was associated with a higher risk of postoperative ileus (n = 4/53, 7.5% vs 0%, P = 0.002) and rectal fistula (n = 3/53, 6% vs 0%, P =0.01) but less wound abscess (n = 1/53, 2% vs 24/169, 14%, P = 0.02) than Kraske modified procedures. RRT was malignant in 8%. After a mean follow up of 27 ±39 (1–221) months, local recurrence was noted in 8% of the patients. After surgery, chronic pain was observed in 17% of the patients without significant difference between the 2 groups (15/74, 20% vs 3/30, 10%; P = 0.3). Conclusions: Both laparoscopic and Kraske modified approaches can be used for surgical treatment of RRT (according to their location and their size), with similar long-term results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of the study was to investigate whether patients who undergo surgery in hospitals experiencing significant length of stay (LOS) reductions over time are exposed to a higher risk of severe adverse events in the postoperative period. Summary Background Data: Surgical care innovation has encouraged hospitals to shorten LOS under financial pressures with uncertain impact on patient outcomes. Methods: We selected all patients who underwent elective colectomy or urgent hip fracture repair in French hospitals between 2013 and 2016. For each procedure, hospitals were categorized into 3 groups according to variations in their median LOS as follows: major decrease, moderate decrease, and no decrease. These groups were matched using propensity scores based on patients' and hospitals' potential confounders. Potentially avoidable readmission for severe adverse events and death at 6 months were compared between groups using Cox regressions. Results: We considered 98,713 patients in 540 hospitals for colectomy and 206,812 patients in 414 hospitals for hip fracture repair before matching. After colectomy, patient outcomes were not negatively impactedwhen hospitals reduced their LOS [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval): 0.93 (0.78-1.10)]. After hip fracture repair, patients in hospitals with major decreases in LOS had a higher risk of severe adverse events [1.22 (1.11-1.34)] and death [1.17 (1.04-1.32)]. Conclusions: Patients who underwent surgical procedures in hospitals experiencing major decreases in LOS were demonstrated worse postoperative outcomes after urgent hip fracture repair and not after elective colectomy. Development of care bundles to enhance recovery after emergency surgeries may allow better control of LOS reduction and patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess recurrence risk factors following ileocolonic resection (ICR) for Crohn disease (CD) in a nationwide cohort study Summary Background Data: Recurrence rate after ICR for CD can be up to 60%, but its predictive factors have never been evaluated in large prospective cohort studies. Methods: From 2013 to 2015, 346 consecutive patients undergoing ICR for CD and a postoperative ileocoloscopy within 6 to 12 months after surgery at 19 academic French centers were included prospectively. Results: Twelve-month postoperative endoscopic (Rutgeerts score ≥i2) and clinical recurrence rates were 57.6% [95% confidence interval (CI), 54.2- 61.0] and 11.3% (95% CI, 9-13.6), respectively. A total of 185 patients (54%) had a postoperative CD prophylaxis, comprising thiopurine in 69 (20%), or anti-tumor necrosis factor (TNF) therapy in 93 (27%). In multivariate Cox regression analysis, absence of postoperative smoking {odds ratio [OR] = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.40-0.91); P = 0.016}, postoperative prophylaxis [OR = 0.60 (95% CI, 0.41-0.88); P = 0.009], and penetrating disease behavior [OR = 0.58 (95% CI, 0.39-0.86); P=0.007] were the only independent predictors of reduced endoscopic recurrence risk. Postoperative prophylaxis [OR 0.31 (95% CI, 0.15-0.66); P = 0.002), and penetrating behavior [OR = 00.36 (95% CI, 0.16-0.81); P = 0.013), were the only independent predictors of reduced clinical recurrence risk. Postoperative anti-TNF therapy was associated with a significant reduction of both 12-month risks of endoscopic (P < 0.001) and clinical (P = 0.019) recurrences. Conclusion: Absence of postoperative smoking, CD prophylaxis, and penetrating disease behavior could be independent predictors of reduced postoperative recurrence after ICR for CD. Prophylactic anti-TNF therapy reduces both endoscopic and clinical recurrence rates. It suggests that upfront surgery followed by postoperative anti-TNF therapy is probably the best therapeutic approach for complex CD (penetrating disease behavior). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to report the 3-year survival results of the GRECCAR-6 trial. Summary Background Data: Current data on the effect of an extended interval between radiochemotherapy (RCT) and resection for rectal cancer on the rate of complete pathological response (pCR=ypT0N0) is controversial. Furthermore, its effect on oncological outcomes is unknown. Methods: The GRECCAR-6 trial was a phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, controlled trial. Patients with cT3/T4 or TxN+ tumors of the mid or lower rectum who had received RCT (45-50 Gy with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) were included and randomized into a 7- or 11-week waiting period. Primary endpoint was the pCR rate. Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence rates. Results: A total of 265 patients from 24 participating centers were enrolled. A total of 253 patients underwent a mesorectal excision. Overall pCR rate was 17% (43/253). Mean follow-up from surgical resection was 32 ± 8 months. Twenty-four deaths occurred with an 89% OS at 3 years. DFS was 68.7% at 3 years (75 recurrences). Three-year local and distant recurrences were 7.9% and 23.8%, respectively. The randomization group had no impact on the 3- year OS (P = 0.8868) or DFS (P = 0.9409). Distant (P = 0.7432) and local (P = 0.3944) recurrences were also not influenced by the waiting period. DFS was independently influenced by 3 factors: circumferential radial margin (CRM) ≤1 mm [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.03; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.17-3.51], ypT3-T4 (HR = 2.69; 95% CI, 1.19-6.08) and positive lymph nodes (HR = 3.62; 95% CI, 1.89-6.91). Conclusion: Extending the waiting period by 4 weeks following RCT has no influence on the oncological outcomes of T3/T4 rectal cancers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare outcome of single-port laparoscopy (SPL) and multiport laparoscopy (MPL) laparoscopy for colonic surgery. Summary of Background Data: Benefits of SPL over MPL are yet to be demonstrated in large randomized trials. Methods: In this prospective, double-blinded, superiority trial, patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection for benign or malignant disease were randomly assigned to SPL or MPL (NCT01959087). Primary outcome was length of theoretical hospital stay (LHS). Results: One hundred twenty-eight patients were randomized and 125 analyzed: 62 SPL and 63 MPL, including 91 right (SPL: n = 44, 71%; MPL: n = 47, 75%) and 34 left (SPL: n = 18, 29%; MPL: n = 16, 25%) colectomies, performed for Crohn disease (n = 53, 42%), cancer (n = 36, 29%), diverticulitis (n = 21, 17%), or benign neoplasia (n = 15, 12%). Additional port insertion was required in 5 (8%) SPL patients and conversion to laparotomy occurred in 7 patients (SPL: n = 3, 5%; MPL: n = 4, 7%; P = 1.000). Total length of skin incision was significantly shorter in the SPL group [SPL: 56 ± 41 (range, 30–300) mm; MPL: 87 ± 40 (50–250) mm; P < 0.001]. Procedure duration, intraoperative complication rate, postoperative 30-day morbidity, postoperative pain, and time to first bowel movement were similar between the groups, leading to similar theoretical LHS (SPL: 6 ± 3 days; MPL: 6 ± 2; P = 0.298). At 6 months, quality of life was similar between groups, but patients from the SPL group were significantly more satisfied with their scar aspect than patients from the MPL group (P = 0.003). Conclusion: SPL colectomy does not confer any additional benefit other than cosmetic result, as compared to MPL. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine the risk factors of morbidity after surgery for ileocolonic Crohn disease (CD). Summary Background Data: The risk factors of morbidity after surgery for CD, particularly the role of anti-TNF therapy, remain controversial and have not been evaluated in a large prospective cohort study. Methods: From 2013 to 2015, data on 592 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for CD in 19 French specialty centers were collected prospectively. Possible relationships between anti-TNF and postoperative overall morbidity were tested by univariate and multivariate analyses. Because treatment by anti-TNF is possibly dependent on the characteristics of the patients and disease, a propensity score was calculated and introduced in the analyses using adjustment of the inverse probability of treatment-weighted method. Results: Postoperative mortality, overall and intra-abdominal septic morbidity rates in the entire cohort were 0%, 29.7% and 8.4%, respectively; 143 (24.1%) patients had received anti-TNF <3 months prior to surgery. In the multivariate analysis, anti-TNF <3 months prior to surgery was identified as an independent risk factor of the overall postoperative morbidity (odds-ratio [OR] =1.99; confidence interval [CI] 95% = 1.17- 3.39, P = 0.011), with preoperative hemoglobin <10 g/dL (OR = 4.77; CI 95% =1.32-17.35, P = 0.017), operative time >180 min (OR =2.71; CI 95% = 1.54-4.78, P < 0.001) and recurrent CD (OR = 1.99; CI 95% = 1.13-3.36, P = 0.017). After calculating the propensity score and adjustment according to the inverse probability of treatment-weighted method, anti-TNF <3 months prior to surgery remained associated with a higher risk of overall (OR = 2.98; CI 95% = 2.04-4.35, P <0.0001) and intra-abdominal septic postoperative morbidities (OR = 2.22; CI 95% = 1.22-4.04, P = 0.009). Conclusions: Preoperative anti-TNF therapy is associated with a higher risk of morbidity after surgery for ileocolonic CD. This information should be considered in the surgical management of these patients, particularly with regard to the preoperative preparation and indication of temporary defunctioning stoma. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To determine the cumulative incidence and the prognostic factors of ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) failure after colectomy for ulcerative colitis (UC). Background: Although ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is recommended after colectomy for UC, IRA is still performed. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective cohort study, which included patients with IRA for UC performed between 1960 and 2014. IRA failure was defined as secondary proctectomy and/or rectal cancer occurrence. Uni- and multivariate survival analyses were performed using Cox-proportional hazards models. Results: A total of 343 patients from 13 French centers were included. Median follow up after IRA was 10.6 years. IRA failure rates were estimated at 27.0% (95% confidence interval, CI, 22–32) and 40.0% (95% CI 33–47) at 10 and 20 years, respectively. Median survival time without IRA failure was estimated at 26.8 years. Two thirds of secondary proctectomies were performed for refractory proctitis, and 20% for rectal neoplasia. Univariate analysis identified factors associated with IRA failure: IRA performed after 2005, a longer duration of disease at the time of IRA, indication for colectomy and having received immunomodulative agents before IRA. In multivariate analysis, treatment with both immunosuppressant (IS) and anti-TNF before colectomy was independently associated with IRA failure (HR=2.9, 95% CI 1.2–7.1). Conversely, colectomy for severe acute colitis was associated with decreased risk of IRA failure (HR=0.6, 95% CI 0.4–0.97). Discussion: Patients with UC have a high risk of IRA failure, particularly when colectomy is performed for refractory disease. However, IRA could be discussed after colectomy for severe acute colitis, or in patients naive to IS and anti-TNF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether a perioperative, standardized clinical pathway could impact the failure-to-rescue rate after cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) in a tertiary center. Summary of Background Data: Morbidity and mortality remain significant after CRS for PC. Clinical pathways have been associated with better outcomes after surgery. The failure-to-rescue rate is a useful metric for evaluating quality in surgery. Materials and Methods: This study included 666 patients that received CRS for PC between 2009 and 2014. Starting in 2012, a standardized perioperative clinical pathway was introduced, which focused on patient selection, nutrition, renal protection, pain management, prevention, and early detection of complications. Complications were evaluated with the National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. We used multivariate analyses to evaluate clinicopathological and perioperative factors for associations with major complications and failure-to-rescue. Complication rates were compared before and after the clinical pathway implementation. Results: Major complications occurred in 341 patients (51%), leading to 15 deaths. The complication rate was similar before and after clinical pathway introduction (54.75% vs 48.9%, respectively; P = 0.138). Only prolonged surgery (longer than 240 mins) was independently associated with major complications. The failure-to-rescue rate was 4.4% for the entire period, but it significantly decreased after introducing the clinical pathway (9.02% vs 1.02%; P < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, only renal complications were associated with the failure-to-rescue. Conclusion: Morbidity after CRS remains significant, but standardized management facilitated a reduction in the failure-to-rescue rate and improved the quality of care. Specific effort should be dedicated to preventing postoperative renal failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To assess the effect of pelvic drainage after rectal surgery for cancer. Background: Pelvic sepsis is one of the major complications after rectal excision for rectal cancer. Although many studies have confirmed infectiveness of drainage after colectomy, there is still a controversy after rectal surgery. Methods: This multicenter randomized trial with 2 parallel arms (drain vs no drain) was performed between 2011 and 2014. Primary endpoint was postoperative pelvic sepsis within 30 postoperative days, including anastomotic leakage, pelvic abscess, and peritonitis. Secondary endpoints were overall morbidity and mortality, rate of reoperation, length of hospital stay, and rate of stoma closure at 6 months. Results: A total of 494 patients were randomized, 25 did not meet the criteria and 469 were analyzed: 236 with drain and 233 without. The anastomotic height was 3.5 ± 1.9 cm from the anal verge. The rate of pelvic sepsis was 17.1% (80/469) and was similar between drain and no drain: 16.1% versus 18.0% (P = 0.58). There was no difference of surgical morbidity (18.7% vs 25.3%; P = 0.83), rate of reoperation (16.6% vs 21.0%; P = 0.22), length of hospital stay (12.2 vs 12.2; P = 0.99) and rate of stoma closure (80.1% vs 77.3%; P = 0.53) between groups. Absence of colonic pouch was the only independent factor of pelvic sepsis (odds ratio = 1.757; 95% confidence interval 1.078-2.864; P = 0.024). Conclusions: This randomized trial suggests that the use of a pelvic drain after rectal excision for rectal cancer did not confer any benefit to the patient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]