Search

Aim: The long‐term urological sequelae after iatrogenic ureteral injury (IUI) during colorectal surgery are not clearly known. The aims of this work were to report the incidence of IUI and to analyse the long‐term consequences of urological late complications and their impact on oncological results of IUI occurring during colorectal surgery through a French multicentric experience (GRECCAR group). Method: All the patients who presented with IUI during colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2019 were retrospectively included. Patients with ureteral involvement needing en bloc resection, delayed ureteral stricture or noncolorectal surgery were not considered. Results: A total of 202 patients (93 men, mean age 63 ± 14 years) were identified in 29 centres, corresponding to 0.32% of colorectal surgeries (n = 63 562). Index colorectal surgery was mainly oncological (n = 130, 64%). IUI was diagnosed postoperatively in 112 patients (55%) after a mean delay of 11 ± 9 days. Intraoperative diagnosis of IUI was significantly associated with shorter length of stay (21 ± 22 days vs. 34 ± 22 days, p < 0.0001), lower rates of postoperative hydronephrosis (2% vs. 10%, p = 0.04), anastomotic complication (7% vs. 22.5%, p = 0.002) and thromboembolic event (0% vs. 6%, p = 0.02) than postoperative diagnosis of IUI. Delayed chemotherapy because of IUI was reported in 27% of patients. At the end of the follow‐up [3 ± 2.6 years (1 month–13 years)], 72 patients presented with urological sequalae (36%). Six patients (3%) required a nephrectomy. Conclusion: IUI during colorectal surgery has few consequences for the patients if recognized early. Long‐term urological sequelae can occur in a third of patients. IUI may affect oncological outcomes in colorectal surgery by delaying adjuvant chemotherapy, especially when the ureteral injury is not diagnosed peroperatively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim A fair to moderate concordance in grading of the total mesorectal excision ( TME) surgical specimen by local pathologists and a central review panel has been observed in the PROCARE (Project on Cancer of the Rectum) project. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the difference, if any, in the accuracy of predicting the oncological outcome through TME grading by local pathologists or by the review panel. Method The quality of the TME specimen was reviewed for 482 surgical specimens registered on a prospective database between 2006 and 2011. Patients with a Stage IV tumour, with unknown incidence date or without follow-up information were excluded, resulting in a study population of 383 patients. Quality assessment of the specimen was based on three grades including mesorectal resection ( MRR), intramesorectal resection ( IMR) and muscularis propria resection ( MPR). Using univariable Cox regression models, local and review panel histopathological gradings of the quality of TME were assessed as predictors of local recurrence, distant metastasis and disease-free and overall survival. Differences in the predictions between local and review grading were determined. Results Resection planes were concordant in 215 (56.1%) specimens. Downgrading from MRR to MPR was noted in 23 (6.0%). There were no significant differences in the prediction error between the two models; local and central review TME grading predicted the outcome equally well. Conclusion Any difference in grading of the TME specimen between local histopathologists and the review panel had no significant impact on the prediction of oncological outcome for this patient cohort. Grading of the quality of TME as reported by local histopathologists can therefore be used for outcome analysis. Quality control of TME grading is not warranted provided the histopathologist is adequately trained. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]