Search

Aim: While postoperative C‐reactive protein (CRP) is used routinely as an early indicator of anastomotic leak (AL), preoperative CRP remains to be established as a potential predictor of AL for elective colorectal surgery. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is to examine the association between preoperative CRP and postoperative complications including AL. Method: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, PubMed, Cochrane Library and CINAHL databases were searched. Studies with reported preoperative CRP values and short‐term surgical outcomes after elective colorectal surgery were included. An inverse variance random effects meta‐analysis was performed for all meta‐analysed outcomes to determine if patients with or without complications and AL differed in their preoperative CRP levels. Risk of bias was assessed with MINORS and certainty of evidence with GRADE. Results: From 1945 citations, 23 studies evaluating 7147 patients were included. Patients experiencing postoperative infective complications had significantly greater preoperative CRP values [eight studies, n = 2421 patients, mean difference (MD) 8.0, 95% CI 3.77–12.23, p < 0.01]. A significant interaction was observed with subgroup analysis based on whether patients were undergoing surgery for inflammatory bowel disease (X2 = 8.99, p < 0.01). Preoperative CRP values were not significantly different between patients experiencing and not experiencing AL (seven studies, n = 3317, MD 2.15, 95% CI −2.35 to 6.66, p = 0.35), nor were they different between patients experiencing and not experiencing overall postoperative morbidity (nine studies, n = 2958, MD 4.54, 95% CI −2.55 to 11.62, p = 0.31) after elective colorectal surgery. Conclusion: Higher preoperative CRP levels are associated with increased rates of overall infective complications, but not with AL alone or with overall morbidity in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Maintenance of normothermia is a crucial part of enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery. Dry‐cold carbon dioxide (CO2) traditionally used for insufflation in laparoscopic surgery and negative pressure operating theatres has been associated with intraoperative hypothermia. Studies suggest that use of warmed‐humidified CO2 may promote normothermia. However, due to a scarcity of high‐quality studies demonstrating a proven benefit on intraoperative core body temperature, its use in colorectal surgery remains limited. Therefore, the aim of this review was to evaluate the effects of warmed‐humidified CO2 compared to traditional dry‐cold CO2, or ambient air in operating theatres, during colorectal surgery. Methods: A search of Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL was performed. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared patients receiving warmed‐humidified CO2 with either dry‐cold CO2 insufflation in laparoscopic procedures or no insufflation during open surgery were included. The primary outcome was change in intraoperative core body temperature. Secondary outcomes included length of stay, operating time, return of gastrointestinal function, wound infection, and postoperative pain. A pairwise meta‐analysis was performed using inverse variance random effects. Results: Among the six RCTs included, 208 patients received warmed‐humidified CO2 (42.3% female, mean age: 65.8 years) and 210 patients received either dry‐cold CO2 in laparoscopic procedures or no gas insufflation during open procedures (46.2% female, mean age: 66.1 years). No significant difference was found for change in intraoperative core body temperature (MD = 0.01, 95% CI: −0.1, 0.11, p = 0.90, very low certainty). Patients in the warmed‐humidified CO2 group had significantly higher pain scores on postoperative day 1 (MD = 1.61, 95% CI: 0.91, 2.31, p < 0.05, very low certainty). No significant differences were found in any of the other secondary outcomes studied. Conclusion: Patients undergoing colorectal surgery receiving warmed‐humidified CO2 do not experience any clinically meaningful difference in core body temperature change compared to their counterparts receiving dry‐cold CO2 insufflation or no insufflation. However, patients may report greater pain scores on postoperative day 1 with warmed‐humidified CO2. There is likely no clinically important difference between warmed‐humidified CO2 and dry‐cold CO2 for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Patient, clinician, and institution factors should be considered when deciding between these two insufflation modalities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The general management for chronic kidney disease (CKD) includes treating reversible causes, including obesity, which may be both a driver and comorbidity for CKD. Bariatric surgery has been shown to reduce the likelihood of CKD progression and improve kidney function in observational studies. We performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of patients with at least stage 3 CKD and obesity receiving bariatric surgery. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, CENTRAL and identified eligible studies reporting on kidney function outcomes in included patients before and after bariatric surgery with comparison to a medical intervention control if available. Risk of bias was assessed with the Newcastle‐Ottawa Risk of Bias score. Nineteen studies were included for synthesis. Bariatric surgery showed improved eGFR with a mean difference (MD) of 11.64 (95%CI: 5.84 to 17.45, I2 = 66%) ml/min/1.73m2 and reduced SCr with MD of −0.24 (95%CI −0.21 to −0.39, I2 = 0%) mg/dl after bariatric surgery. There was no significant difference in the relative risk (RR) of having CKD stage 3 after bariatric surgery, with a RR of −1.13 (95%CI: −0.83 to −2.07, I2 = 13%), but there was reduced likelihood of having uACR >30 mg/g or above with a RR of −3.03 (95%CI: −1.44 to −6.40, I2 = 91%). Bariatric surgery may be associated with improved kidney function with the reduction of BMI and may be a safe treatment option for patients with CKD. Future studies with more robust reporting are required to determine the feasibility of bariatric surgery for the treatment of CKD. SUMMARY AT A GLANCE: Amongst patients with CKD G ≧ 3 and obesity, bariatric surgery improved eGFR and reduced serum creatinine levels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare weight loss, obesity-related comorbidities, and biochemical outcomes of LSG versus LRYGB through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Summary of background data: LSG and LRYGB are the 2 most commonly performed bariatric surgeries for the treatment of obesity. The comparative outcomes of the 2 surgeries is a topic of ongoing debate and medium-term outcomes remain uncertain. Methods: A search for RCTs comparing LRYGB versus LSG was conducted. Pooled outcomes between 2 procedures were compared using pairwise random-effects meta-analysis at 1, 3, and 5-year follow-up time points. Grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation was used to assess certainty of evidence. Results: Thirty-three studies involving 2475 patients were included. LRYGB resulted in greater loss of body mass index compared to LSG at 1 year [mean difference -1.25 kg/m², 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.01 to -0.49, P = 0.001; moderate certainty of evidence] which persisted at 3 years, but there was insufficient evidence at 5 years. Resolution of dyslipidemia was higher for LRYGB than LSG at 1 year (risk ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.46-0.73, P < 0.001; moderate certainty of evidence) and 5 years (risk ratio 0.68, 95%CI 0.46-0.99, P = 0.04; low certainty of evidence). There was no difference between LRYGB and LSG for remission of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and hemoglobin A1c, fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance, high-density lipoprotein, and the rate of 30-day major and minor complications. Conclusions: There are insufficient data from RCTs to draw any conclusions regarding the long-term comparative effectiveness beyond 3 years between LRYGB and LSG. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Surgery is the property of CMA Impact Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Performing endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy is challenging. Double-balloon enteroscopy (DBE) has been shown to be safe and efficacious for ERCP in these patients but attempts to synthesize existing data are limited. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DBE-ERCP in surgically altered anatomy.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases through March 2020 for studies that conducted DBE-ERCP in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy. Primary outcomes were enteroscopic, diagnostic, and procedural success rates of DBE-ERCP. Secondary outcomes were adverse events after DBE-ERCP. Random effects meta-analysis of proportions was performed when appropriate. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate risk of bias. Heterogeneity was assessed using the inconsistency (I2) statistic.Results: 24 studies involving 1523 patients were included. The pooled enteroscopic, diagnostic, and procedural success rates of DBE-ERCP were 90% (95% confidence interval (CI), 84-94%), 94% (95% CI 88-98%), and 93% (95% CI 88-97%). Adverse events were reported in 4% (95% CI 3-6%) of cases. Subgroup analysis of short-scope DBE-ERCP (< 200 cm) and long-scope DBE-ERCP (200 cm) did not demonstrate substantial difference in outcomes.Conclusion: DBE is safe and efficacious for facilitating ERCP in patients with surgically altered gastrointestinal anatomy, but RCTs or comparative studies are required to clarify its role compared to other modalities in surgically altered anatomy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Total proctocolectomy (TPC) with ileal pouch anal anastomosis (IPAA) is commonly performed for patients with refractory ulcerative colitis (UC). Pouchitis occurs in 20–50% of these patients. Fecal calprotectin is a biomarker that correlates well with the pouchitis disease activity index. However, its role in the diagnosis and management of acute pouchitis has not been thoroughly defined. The aim of this study is to review previously established cut-off values and contextualize the clinical utility of fecal calprotectin. Methods: Search of Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed was performed. Articles were eligible if they measured fecal calprotectin in the setting of pouchitis in patients who underwent TPC with IPAA for UC. Risk of bias of the included studies was evaluated with the QUADAS-2. Results: From 117 relevant citations, seven studies with 256 patients (44.8% female, 39.88 years) met inclusion criteria. The pooled prevalence of pouchitis was 42%. The derived fecal calprotectin cut-off values ranged from 56 to 494 μg/g. The corresponding sensitivities and specificities ranged from 57 to 100% and 38 to 92%, respectively. The area under the curve was reported in three studies and ranged from 0.832 to 0.840. Conclusion: Fecal calprotectin may be a reliable diagnostic tool for acute pouchitis in patients following TPC with IPAA for UC. The high sensitivity of fecal calprotectin for detection of pouchitis makes it a valuable test for ruling out pouchitis. When used in conjunction with other biomarkers, the high specificity offers value in ruling in pouchitis. However, given the complexity of this disease process, relying solely on biomarkers for diagnosis is currently unreasonable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review of the existing literature to determine the effect of bariatric surgery on various pharmacokinetic parameters of oral antibiotic absorption as well as overall patient outcomes. Materials and Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched up to February 2020. Outcomes of interest included change in pharmacokinetic parameters of oral antibiotics administered to patients following bariatric surgery, using variables such as maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), time to reach maximum plasma concentration (Tmax), area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), clearance, and volume of distribution. MINORS and Cochrane risk of bias tools were used to assess quality of evidence. Results: Ten studies with 100 patients assessing 8 oral antibiotics were included. The majority (77%) of patients underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB), with fewer undergoing ventral banded gastroplasty (VBG) (14%), jejunoileostomy (6%), and jejunoileal bypass (3%). Antibiotic classes investigated included beta-lactams (5 studies), fluoroquinolones (2 studies), macrolides (2 studies), and oxazolidinones (1 study). Heterogeneity between studies precluded meaningful pooling or meta-analysis of data. Overall risk of bias was fair. Conclusion: Patients given oral beta-lactams and macrolides warrant close monitoring due to unpredictable absorption post-bariatric surgery, whereas oral fluoroquinolones and linezolid may not be affected. Several studies also showed decreased absorption following RYGB, as well as lower serum exposure in patients with obesity compared to non-obese controls. Clinicians should monitor patients on a case-by-case basis for signs of antibiotic failure or toxicity and reassess dosing accordingly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Surgical consultation is recommended for all patients with fulminant Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). If surgery is required, total abdominal colectomy (TAC) is most commonly performed. However, diverting loop ileostomy and colonic lavage have been recently developed as a potential colon-sparing approach to fulminant CDI. The aim of this review is to compare TAC and diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage for fulminant CDI. Methods: Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed was performed. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they compared TAC and diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage. The primary outcome was postoperative mortality, and the secondary outcome was postoperative complications. Quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results: From 64 relevant citations, 5 studies (4 retrospective cohorts, 1 case series) with 3683 patients were included. Compared to TAC, diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage did not significantly reduce overall mortality (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.99, P = 0.77), rate of reoperation (RR 1.02, 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.63, P = 0.94), or overall postoperative complications (RR 0.51, 95% CI, 0.22 to 1.17, P = 0.11). Rates of colonic preservation with the use of diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage ranged from 76% to 100%. Conclusion: There does not appear to be a survival advantage with the use of diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage compared to TAC for fulminant CDI. However, diverting loop ileostomy with colonic lavage results in increased rates of colonic preservation, restoration of intestinal continuity, and laparoscopic surgery. This review is limited by the small number of included studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To systematically review and meta‐analyse the impact of bariatric surgery on obese patients with urinary incontinence (UI). Methods: A search of the Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), the Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE), Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and PubMed to June 2018 was performed using methods pre‐published on the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Reporting followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies comparing UI status in obese patients before and after bariatric surgery were included. Primary outcomes were the improvement or complete resolution of any UI, stress UI (SUI), and urgency UI (UUI). Secondary outcomes were validated UI questionnaire scores. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach assessed overall quality of evidence. Results: In all, 33 cohort studies (2910 patients) were included (median follow‐up 12 months). Bariatric surgery resulted in improvement or resolution of any UI in 56% (95% confidence interval [CI] 48–63%), SUI in 47% (95% CI 34–60%), and UUI in 53% (95% CI 32–73%) of patients. Moreover, bariatric surgery significantly decreased (P < 0.001) questionnaire scores such as: the Urogenital Distress Inventory by 13.4 points (95% CI 7.2–19.6), International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire by 4.0 points (95% CI 2.3–5.7), and Incontinence Impact Questionnaire by 5.3 points (95% CI 3.9–6.6). However, worsening or new onset of UI was present in 3% of patients. The quality of evidence was very low for all outcomes. Conclusion: Half of obese patients report improvement or resolution of UI after bariatric surgery, but overall the quality of evidence is very low. Comparative studies examining the benefits of bariatric surgery in obese patients with UI are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Acute urinary retention (AUR) is a common postoperative complication in colorectal surgery. In pelvic colorectal operations, the optimal duration for postoperative urinary catheter use is controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to compare early (POD 1), intermediate (POD 3), and late (POD 5) urinary catheter removal. Methods: Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed databases were searched. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they compared patients with urinary catheter removal on POD 1 or earlier to patients with urinary catheter removal on POD 2 or later in major pelvic colorectal surgeries. The primary outcome was rate of postoperative AUR. The secondary outcome was rates of postoperative urinary tract infection (UTI). Results: From 691 relevant citations, five studies with 928 patients were included. Comparison of urinary catheter removal on POD 1 versus POD 3 demonstrated no significant difference in rate of urinary retention (RR 1.36, 95%CI 0.83–2.21, P = 0.22); however, compared to POD 5, rates of AUR were significantly higher (RR 2.58, 95%CI 1.51–4.40, P = 0.0005). Rates of UTI were not significantly different between POD 1 and POD 3 urinary catheter removal (RR 0.40, 95%CI 0.05–3.71, P = 0.45), but removal on POD 5 significantly increased risk of UTI compared to POD 1 (RR 0.50, 95%CI 0.31–0.81, P = 0.005). Conclusion: Risk of AUR can be minimized with late postoperative urinary catheter removal compared to early removal, but at the cost of increased risk of UTI. Patient-specific factors should be taken into consideration when deciding upon optimal duration of postoperative urinary catheterization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bariatric surgery involves the risk of postoperative infectious complications, in particular, anastomotic leaks and intra-abdominal abscesses. C-reactive protein (CRP) is a nonspecific marker of inflammation which has gained attention as a test to predict postoperative infectious complications. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic value of CRP to detect postoperative infectious complications after bariatric surgery. Methods: Search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and PubMed databases were performed. Articles measuring serum CRP postoperatively in patients with obesity undergoing bariatric surgery were included. Main outcomes included diagnostic value of postoperative serum CRP (area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV)). Diagnostic accuracy of included studies was assessed using QUADAS-2. Results: Six studies including 2770 patients met the inclusion criteria. The derived CRP cutoff values were 71.4 mg/dL, 130.3 mg/dL, and 118.7 mg/dL on postoperative days (PODs) 1, 3, and 5, respectively. Pooled AUC was similar across PODs 1, 3, and 5 with AUC being highest on POD 5 (0.88 ± 0.07). PPV was between 19 and 21%, and NPV was between 98 and 99%. CRP levels were significantly higher (P <.0001) in postoperative infectious complication group versus the no complication group on PODs 3 and 5. Conclusions: High NPV and moderately high sensitivity on PODs 1, 3, and 5 may help predict patients who are at a low risk of infectious complication following bariatric surgery. High specificity on PODs 1 and 3 also indicates that it can be useful for early diagnosis of postoperative infectious complications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Highlights • BMI loss is greater when omentectomy is added to bariatric surgery • However, bariatric surgery alone has greater effect in increasing HDL • Adding omentectomy does not improve insulin, glucose, lipids, and adipocytokines • Therapeutic use of omentectomy added to bariatric surgery is not warranted Abstract Background Excess visceral adipose tissue has been identified as an important risk factor for obesity-related co-morbidities. Conflicting information exists on whether omentectomy added to bariatric surgery is beneficial to metabolic variables. Objective To evaluate the impact of omentectomy added to bariatric surgery on metabolic outcomes Setting University Hospital, Canada. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PubMed were searched up to May 2018. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were randomized controlled trials comparing omentectomy added to bariatric surgery with bariatric surgery alone. Primary outcome measures were absolute change in metabolic variables (body mass index, insulin, glucose, cholesterol, lipoproteins, and triglycerides); secondary outcomes were changes in adipocytokines. Pooled mean differences (mean deviation; MD) were calculated using random effects meta-analyses, and heterogeneity was quantified using the I 2 statistic. Results Ten trials involving a total of 366 patients met the inclusion criteria with a median follow-up time of 1 year after surgery. Adding omentectomy to bariatric surgery demonstrated a minimal but statistically significant decrease in body mass index compared with bariatric surgery alone (MD 1.29, 95% confidence interval.35–2.23, P =.007, I 2 = 0%, 10 trials). Conversely, patients who underwent bariatric surgery alone had significant increases in high-density lipoprotein (MD −2.12, 95% confidence interval −4.13 to −.11, P =.04, I 2 = 0%, 6 trials). Other metabolic outcomes and adipocytokines showed no significant difference between procedures. Conclusion The addition of omentectomy to bariatric surgery results in minimal reduction of body mass index. Considering no overall improvement in metabolic outcomes and the time and effort required, the therapeutic use of omentectomy added to bariatric surgery is not warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abdominoperineal resection (APR) is the primary surgical approach to low rectal cancers. Both prone and lithotomy patient positioning during the perineal dissection are currently acceptable approaches. There is no consensus on whether patient positioning has an impact on operative and oncologic outcomes. The aim of this review was to compare the perioperative and long-term oncologic outcomes between prone and lithotomy patient positioning. Search of Medline, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, PubMed, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases was performed. Articles were eligible for inclusion if they compared prone and lithotomy positioning for the perineal portion of APR for rectal cancer in one of the primary outcomes. Quality of included studies was assessed using Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Nine studies with 888 patients in the prone group and 897 in the lithotomy group were included. Compared with lithotomy position, prone position had a significantly lower perforation rate (risk ratio: 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32 to 0.79, P = 0.003) and rates of positive circumferential resection margin involvement (risk ratio: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.44 to 1.00, P = 0.05). Prone position also had a significantly shorter operative time than lithotomy position (mean difference: −45.20 min, 95% CI: −63.03 to -27.36, P < 0.00001). Positioning did not affect 5-y overall survival or local and distal recurrence. Prone positioning may lead to lower rates of perforation and circumferential resection margin involvement in APR. In addition, it may lead to shorter operative time. Larger randomized studies are required to confirm the results of this review and examine the difference in long-term outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]