Search

BACKGROUND: Several pivotal studies and international guidelines on the perioperative management of rectal cancer have been published. However, little is known about the current state of perioperative management of rectal cancer patients in clinical practice worldwide.METHODS: An online survey including 13 questions focusing on key topics related to the perioperative management of patients with rectal cancer was conducted among colorectal surgeons registered within the database of the Research Institute Against Digestive Cancer (IRCAD).RESULTS: A total of 535 respondents from 89 countries participated in the survey. Most surgeons worked in the European region (40.9%). Two hundred and fifty-four respondents (47.5%) performed less than 25% of surgical procedures laparoscopically. The most commonly used definition of the upper limit of the rectum was a fixed distance from the anal verge (23.4%). Magnetic resonance imaging was used to define the upper limit of the rectum by 258 respondents (48.2%). During total mesorectal excision (TME), 301 respondents (56.3%) used a high-tie technique. The most commonly constructed anastomosis was an end-to-end anastomosis (68.2%) with the majority of surgeons performing a leak test intraoperatively (88.9%). A total of 355 respondents (66.4%) constructed a diverting ostomy, and the majority of these surgeons constructed an enterostomy (82%). A total of 208 respondents (39.3%) closed a stoma within 8 weeks. Lastly, 135 respondents (25.2%) introduced a solid diet on postoperative day 1.CONCLUSION: There is considerable heterogeneity in the perioperative management of rectal cancer patients worldwide with several discrepancies between current international practice and recommendations from international guidelines. To achieve worldwide standardization in rectal cancer care, further research is needed to elucidate the cause of this heterogeneity and find ways of improved implementation of best practice recommendations.

Introduction To assess the current approaches and perioperative treatments of laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (LRHC) and to highlight similarities and differences with international guidelines and scientific evidence, we conducted a survey for surgeons across the globe. Methods All digestive and colorectal surgeons registered with the database of the Research Institute against Digestive Cancer (IRCAD) were invited to take part in the survey via email and through the social media networks of IRCAD. Results There were a total of 440 respondents from 78 countries. Most surgeons worked in the European region (38.6%) followed by the Americas (34.1%), the Eastern Mediterranean region (13.0%), the South-East Asian region (5.9%), the Western Pacific region (4.8%), and Africa (3.2%) respectively. Over half of the respondents performed less than 25% of right hemicolectomies laparoscopically where 4 ports are usually used by 68% of the surgeons. The medial-to-lateral, vessel-first approach is the approach most commonly used (74.1%). The most common extraction site was through a midline incision (53%) and an abdominal drain tube is routinely used by 52% of the surgeons after surgery. A total of 68.6% of the responding surgeons perform the majority of the anastomoses extracorporeally. Finally, we found that the majority of responders (60.7%) routinely used mechanical bowel preparations prior to LRHC. Conclusion Regarding several topics related to LRHC care, a discrepancy was observed between the current medical practice and the recommendations from RCTs and international guidelines and significant regional differences were observed. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-022-09044-w.

A considerable number of surgical residents fail the mandated endoscopy exam despite having completed the required clinical cases. Low-cost endoscopy box trainers (BTs) could democratize training; however, their effectiveness has never been compared with higher-cost virtual reality simulators (VRSs).In this randomized noninferiority trial, endoscopy novices trained either on the VRS used in the Fundamental of Endoscopic Surgery manual skills (FESms) exam or a validated BT-the Basic Endoscopic Skills Training (BEST) box. Trainees were tested at fixed timepoints on the FESms and on standardized ex vivo models. The primary endpoint was FESms improvement at 1 week. Secondary endpoints were FESms improvement at 2 weeks, FESms pass rates, ex vivo tests performance, and trainees' feedback.Seventy-seven trainees completed the study. VRS and BT trainees showed comparable FESms improvements (25.16 ± 14.29 vs 25.58 ± 11.75 FESms points, respectively; p = 0.89), FESms pass rates (76.32% vs 61.54%, respectively; p = 0.16) and total ex vivo tasks completion times (365.76 ± 237.56 vs 322.68 ± 186.04 seconds, respectively; p = 0.55) after 1 week. Performances were comparable also after 2 weeks of training, but FESms pass rates increased significantly only in the first week. Trainees were significantly more satisfied with the BT platform (3.97 ± 1.20 vs 4.81 ± 0.40 points on a 5-point Likert scale for the VRS and the BT, respectively; p0.001).Simulation-based training is an effective means to develop competency in endoscopy, especially at the beginning of the learning curve. Low-cost BTs like the BEST box compare well with high-tech VRSs and could help democratize endoscopy training.

A computer vision (CV) platform named EndoDigest was recently developed to facilitate the use of surgical videos. Specifically, EndoDigest automatically provides short video clips to effectively document the critical view of safety (CVS) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The aim of the present study is to validate EndoDigest on a multicentric dataset of LC videos.LC videos from 4 centers were manually annotated with the time of the cystic duct division and an assessment of CVS criteria. Incomplete recordings, bailout procedures and procedures with an intraoperative cholangiogram were excluded. EndoDigest leveraged predictions of deep learning models for workflow analysis in a rule-based inference system designed to estimate the time of the cystic duct division. Performance was assessed by computing the error in estimating the manually annotated time of the cystic duct division. To provide concise video documentation of CVS, EndoDigest extracted video clips showing the 2 min preceding and the 30 s following the predicted cystic duct division. The relevance of the documentation was evaluated by assessing CVS in automatically extracted 2.5-min-long video clips.144 of the 174 LC videos from 4 centers were analyzed. EndoDigest located the time of the cystic duct division with a mean error of 124.0 ± 270.6 s despite the use of fluorescent cholangiography in 27 procedures and great variations in surgical workflows across centers. The surgical evaluation found that 108 (75.0%) of the automatically extracted short video clips documented CVS effectively.EndoDigest was robust enough to reliably locate the time of the cystic duct division and efficiently video document CVS despite the highly variable workflows. Training specifically on data from each center could improve results; however, this multicentric validation shows the potential for clinical translation of this surgical data science tool to efficiently document surgical safety.

IMPORTANCE: The efficacy of fundoplication operations in the management of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been documented. However, few prospective, controlled series report long-term (>10 years) efficacy and postfundoplication concerns, particularly when comparing various types of fundoplication. OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term (>15 years) results regarding mechanical complications, reflux control, and quality of life between patients undergoing posterior partial fundoplication (PF) or total fundoplication (TF) (270° vs 360°) in surgical treatment for GERD. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A double-blind randomized clinical trial was performed at a single center (Ersta Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden) from November 19, 2001, to January 24, 2006. A total of 456 patients were recruited and randomized. Data for this analysis were collected from August 1, 2019, to January 31, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Laparoscopic 270° posterior PF vs 360° TF. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The main outcome was dysphagia scores for solid and liquid food items after more than 15 years. Generic (36-Item Short-Form Health Survey) and disease-specific (Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale) quality of life and proton pump inhibitor consumption were also assessed. RESULTS: Among 407 available patients, relevant data were obtained from 310 (response rate, 76%; mean [SD] age, 66 [11.2] years; 184 [59%] men). A total of 159 were allocated to a PF and 151 to a TF. The mean (SD) follow-up time was 16 (1.3) years. At 15 years after surgery, mean (SD) dysphagia scores were low for both liquids (PF, 1.2 [0.5]; TF, 1.2 [0.5]; P = .58) and solids (PF, 1.3 [0.6]; TF, 1.3 [0.5]; P = .97), without statistically significant differences between the groups. Reflux symptoms were equally well controlled by the 2 types of fundoplications as were the improvements of quality-of-life scores. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The long-term findings of this randomized clinical trial indicate that PF and TF are equally effective for controlling GERD and quality of life in the long term. Although PF was superior in the first years after surgery in terms of less dysphagia recorded, this difference did not prevail when assessed a decade later. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04182178