Search

Despite the development of new technologies and multimodal therapies, improving the prognosis of patients with UICC stage III right colon adenocarcinoma remains challenging. Several randomized controlled trials have shown the oncological non-inferiority of minimally invasive surgery compared to open surgery for colon cancer patients. However, for UICC stage III patients, carrying the highest risk for local recurrence and the worst survival, the evidence remains inconclusive. The aim of this systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis is to improve the scarce evidence regarding minimally invasive surgery for this subgroup of patients. Data from adult patients with pathologically UICC stage III right adenocarcinoma of the colon will be included. The intervention to be assessed is the minimally invasive right hemicolectomy in comparison with the open procedure. The primary outcome will be the 5-year overall survival. Secondary outcomes will include further long-term outcomes, such as disease-free survival, short term, and histological outcomes. Only randomized controlled trials and quasi-randomized controlled clinical trials will be included. The literature search will be conducted in the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, Cochrane Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science. The review will be performed using the Cochrane methodology including GRADE tools. The findings of this meta-analysis will be important for choosing optimal treatment pathways and tailoring of surgical therapy in patients with locally advanced UICC stage III right colon cancer.

Abstract Background Incisional hernia is a frequent complication following loop ileostomy reversal. Incisional hernias are associated with morbidity, loss of health-related quality of life and costs and warrant the investigation of prophylactic measures. Prophylactic mesh implantation at the time of surgical stoma reversal has shown to be a promising and safe method to prevent incisional hernias in this setting. However, the efficacy of this method has not yet been investigated in a large multicentre randomised-controlled trial (RCT) with adequate external validity. The P.E.L.I.O.N. trial will evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic mesh reinforcement after loop ileostomy closure in decreasing the rate of incisional hernia versus standard closure alone. Methods P.E.L.I.O.N. is a multicentre, patient- and observer-blind RCT. Patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure will undergo intraoperative 1:1 randomisation into either abdominal wall closure with a continuous slowly absorbable suture in small-stitch technique without mesh reinforcement (control group) or abdominal wall closure with an additional reinforcement with a retromuscular non-absorbable, macro-pore (pore size ≥ 1000 μm or effective porosity >0%) light-weight monofilament or mixed structure mesh. A total of 304 patients (152 per group) will need to be randomised in the study. Based on inclusion and exclusion criteria, 1,014 patients are expected to be screened for eligibility in order to recruit the necessary number of patients. The primary endpoint will be the frequency of incision hernias within 24 months according to the European Hernia Society definition. Secondary endpoints will be the frequency of surgical site occurrences (including surgical site infections, wound seromas and hematomas, and enterocutaneous fistulas), postoperative pain, the number of revision surgeries and health-related quality of life. Safety will be assessed by measuring postoperative complications ≥ grade 3 according to the Dindo-Clavien classification. Discussion Depending on the results of the P.E.L.I.O.N. trial, prophylactic mesh implantation could become the new standard for loop ileostomy reversal. Trial registration DRKS00027921, U1111-1273-4657

Prehabilitation is a multimodal concept to improve functional capability prior to surgery, so that the patients’ resilience is strengthened to withstand any peri- and postoperative comorbidity. It covers physical activities, nutrition, and psychosocial wellbeing. The literature is heterogeneous in outcomes and definitions. In this scoping review, class 1 and 2 evidence was included to identify seven main aspects of prehabilitation for the treatment pathway: (i) risk assessment, (ii) FITT (frequency, interventions, time, type of exercise) principles of prehabilitation exercise, (iii) outcome measures, (iv) nutrition, (v) patient blood management, (vi) mental wellbeing, and (vii) economic potential. Recommendations include the risk of tumor progression due to delay of surgery. Patients undergoing prehabilitation should perceive risk assessment by structured, quantifiable, and validated tools like Risk Analysis Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), American Society of Anesthesiology Score, or Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group scoring. Assessments should be repeated to quantify its effects. The most common types of exercise include breathing exercises and moderate- to high-intensity interval protocols. The program should have a duration of 3–6 weeks with 3–4 exercises per week that take 30–60 min. The 6-Minute Walking Testing is a valid and resource-saving tool to assess changes in aerobic capacity. Long-term assessment should include standardized outcome measurements (overall survival, 90-day survival, Dindo–Clavien/CCI®) to monitor the potential of up to 50% less morbidity. Finally, individual cost-revenue assessment can help assess health economics, confirming the hypothetic saving of $8 for treatment for $1 spent for prehabilitation. These recommendations should serve as a toolbox to generate hypotheses, discussion, and systematic approaches to develop clinical prehabilitation standards.

Abstract Background When performing a restorative proctocolectomy (RPC) with an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA), it is common practice to divide the ileocolic artery (ICA) if the patient has a tumor or dysplasia, or in order to gain sufficient length to secure a tension-free anastomosis. However, it is unclear whether there is an association between division of the ICA and the rate of postoperative complications. Methods We retrospectively analysed all patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent RPC and IPAA in our department between January 2010 and December 2016. These were divided in two groups, with regard to the ICA being preserved (PRE group) or divided (DIV group). Complications such as stenosis or leakage of the IPAA, perianal fistulas, abscess formation within the lesser pelvis and pouchitis were analysed and compared between both groups. Results We identified 130 patients meeting the study inclusion criteria, 49 patients in the PRE and 81 patients in the DIV group. No statistical significance was observed in IPAA leakages (p = 0.71), anastomotic strictures (p = 0.33), fistulas (p = 0.19) and pouchitis (p = 0.72). Abscess formation frequency was similar in both groups (p > 0.99). Moreover, short-term (p = 0.53) and long-term complications (p = 0.11) were similar in both groups. A higher conversion rate was observed in obese (p = 0.006) and male (p = 0.02) patients. Within the entire study population, fistulas and IPAA leakages were associated with a higher rate of anastomotic strictures (p = 0.008 and p = 0.02 respectively). Conclusion Our data suggest similar IPAA related complications after either division or preservation of the ICA. Further trials are required in order to examine the trends observed in this study.