Search

Introduction. Several predictive scores to evaluate outcomes of adrenal surgery for unilateral primary aldosteronism (UPA), have been conceived. We compared a novel trifecta that summarizes outcomes of adrenal surgery for UPA with the clinical cure proposed by Vorselaars. Material and methods. Between March 2011 and January 2022, a multi-institutional dataset was queried for UPA. Baseline, perioperative and functional data were collected. Clinical and biochemical complete and partial success rates according to Primary Aldosteronism Surgical Outcome (PASO) criteria were assessed for the overall cohort. Clinical cure was defined either as normotension without antihypertensive medications or normotension with lower or equal use of antihypertensive medications. Trifecta was defined as the coexistence of =50% antihypertensive therapeutic intensity score (TIS) reduction (ΔTIS), no electrolyte impairment at 3-months and no Clavien-Dindo (2-5) complications. Cox regression analyses were used to identify predictors of long-term clinical and biochemical success. For all analyses, a two-sided p <0.05 was considered significant. Results Baseline, perioperative and functional outcomes were analyzed. Out of 90 patients, at a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 27-54) a complete and partial clinical success was observed in 60% and 17.7% of cases while a complete and partial biochemical success was achieved in 83.3% and 12.3% of cases, respectively. Overall trifecta and clinical cure rates were 21.1% and 58.9%, respectively. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, trifecta achievement (HR 2.87; 95% CI 1.45-5.58; p = 0.02) was the only independent predictor of complete clinical success at long-term follow-up. Conclusions Despite its complex estimation and more restrictive criteria, trifecta but not clinical cure allows to independently predict composite PASO endpoints on the long run. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Despite initial enthusiasm, the use of transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) is still quite limited at present because of the expense of highly specialized equipment and the complexity of the learning curve. Furthermore, some authors report a relevant, although temporary, effect on anorectal function because of the considerable anal dilatation which can even produce a rupture of the internal anal sphincter. The “glove TEM” proposes itself as an alternative to traditional TEM that could settle these problems. Materials and Methods. The technique is accurately described together with the necessary equipment to perform it. Between 2011 and 2012, we operated eight patients with this technique for rectal adenomas or early carcinomas achieving R0 resection in all cases and reporting no early or late complications during the first five months of followup. Discussion. This technique offers multiple advantages compared to the original TEM. (i) It allows the use of all available laparoscopic instruments. (ii) It gives a great manoeuvrability of the instruments in contrast to rigid rectoscope systems. (iii) Given the limited length of the device, it permits to operate on tumors closer to the dentate line. (iv) It is less traumatic to the anal sphincter. It is definitively much cheaper. Conclusions. We believe that this new technique is easy to perform, cost-effective, and less traumatic to the anal sphincter compared to traditional TEM.

Purpose: To analyze different types of management and one-year outcomes of anastomotic leakage (AL) after elective colorectal resection. Methods: All patients with anastomotic leakage after elective colorectal surgery with anastomosis (76/1,546; 4.9%), with the exclusion of cases with proximal diverting stoma, were followed-up for at least one year. Primary endpoints were as follows: composite outcome of one-year mortality and/or unplanned intensive care unit (ICU) admission and additional morbidity rates. Secondary endpoints were as follows: length of stay (LOS), one-year persistent stoma rate, and rate of return to intended oncologic therapy (RIOT). Results: One-year mortality rate was 10.5% and unplanned ICU admission rate was 30.3%. Risk factors of the composite outcome included age (aOR = 1.08 per 1-year increase, p = 0.002) and anastomotic breakdown with end stoma at reoperation (aOR = 2.77, p = 0.007). Additional morbidity rate was 52.6%: risk factors included open versus laparoscopic reoperation (aOR = 4.38, p = 0.03) and ICU admission (aOR = 3.63, p = 0.05). Median (IQR) overall LOS was 20 days (14–26), higher in the subgroup of patients reoperated without stoma. At 1 year, a stoma persisted in 32.0% of patients, higher in the open (41.2%) versus laparoscopic (12.5%) reoperation group (p = 0.04). Only 4 out of 18 patients (22.2%) were able to RIOT. Conclusion: Mortality and/or unplanned ICU admission rates after AL are influenced by increasing age and by anastomotic breakdown at reoperation; additional morbidity rates are influenced by unplanned ICU admission and by laparoscopic approach to reoperation, the latter also reducing permanent stoma and failure to RIOT rates. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT03560180 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of the present study is to analyze risk factors for adverse events after elective colorectal resection. A wide range of adverse events after elective colorectal surgery was reported, anastomotic leakage (AL) and related morbidity and mortality being the most feared ones. Clear definition of risk factors is crucial to limit the related mortality. Prospective, 1-year multicenter enrollment of 1546 elective colorectal resections with anastomosis. Endpoints were anastomotic leakage (AL), overall morbidity, major morbidity and mortality rates (ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT03560180). AL rate was 4.92%. Overall morbidity, major morbidity and mortality rates were 30.20%, 9.76% and 1.29%, respectively. Intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusion(s) was the only variable independently influencing all the endpoints: Odds ratios (OR) were 8.15 for AL, 19.33 for overall morbidity, 10.17 for major morbidity and 3.70 for mortality); overall morbidity rates were also independently influenced by American Society of Anesthesiologists class III vs I–II and extra- vs intra-corporeal anastomosis (OR 1.57 and 1.49, respectively); major morbidity rates were also independently influenced by female vs male gender and by the length of the procedure (OR 0.60 and 1.004, respectively); mortality rates were also independently influenced by increasing age (OR 1.16). This study clearly identifies intra- and/or postoperative blood transfusion(s) as an independent risk factor for all adverse events after elective colorectal surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The COVID19 pandemic had a deep impact on healthcare facilities in Italy, with profound reorganization of surgical activities. The Italian ColoRectal Anastomotic Leakage (iCral) study group collecting 43 Italian surgical centers experienced in colorectal surgery from multiple regions performed a quick survey to make a snapshot of the current situation. Methods: A 25-items questionnaire was sent to the 43 principal investigators of the iCral study group, with questions regarding qualitative and quantitative aspects of the surgical activity before and after the COVID19 outbreak. Results: Two-thirds of the centers were involved in the treatment of COVID19 cases. Intensive care units (ICU) beds were partially or totally reallocated for the treatment of COVID19 cases in 72% of the hospitals. Elective colorectal surgery for malignancy was stopped or delayed in nearly 30% of the centers, with less than 20% of them still scheduling elective colorectal resections for frail and comorbid patients needing postoperative ICU care. A significant reduction of the number of colorectal resections during the time span from January to March 2020 was recorded, with significant delay in treatment in more than 50% of the centers. Discussion: Our survey confirms that COVID19 outbreak is severely affecting the activity of colorectal surgery centers participating to iCral study group. This could impact the activity of surgical centers for many months after the end of the emergency. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and aim This study analyses the impact of the first two pandemic waves on surgical urgencies/emergencies and their consequences on an entire provincial hospital network's surgical activities. Methods  Clinical and epidemiological data of urgent/emergent surgical admissions and interventions in the Autonomous Province of Trento's hospital network were collected from the internal common electronic database. The investigation periods were March-May 2019 (reference period), March-May 2020 (phase-I), June - August 2020 (phase-II), and October - December 2020 (phase-III). The same data were divided and grouped for the six most represented diagnoses. Results: The number of admissions for surgical emergencies in the studied periods showed a sinusoidal trend. In the reference period of 2019, 957 patients were admitted in urgency, while in the three pandemic phases, urgent admissions were 511, 888 and 633 respectively (-47% in phase I, - 8% in phase II, -34% in phase III). This trend was also observed by stratifying admissions for single disease, except for gastrointestinal perforations and pancreatitis, which showed a slight increasing trend in phase-I. Among the studied population, the surgical rate was 35.2% in phase-I and 34.3% in phase-III; these data were significantly higher than in 2019 (25.6%).  Conclusions The effect of the COVID pandemic on surgical emergencies and urgencies (SUEs) was mainly indirect, manifesting itself with a significant reduction in the number of surgical admissions, particularly in phases-I and-III. Conversely, in the same phases, the surgical rate showed a significant increase compared to 2019.

Objectives: to analyse both direct and indirect impacts on surgical admissions, surgical rates, and clinical picture severity of the two COVID-19 pandemic waves in a hospital network covering an entire province (Trento, located in Trentino-Alto Adige Region, Northern Italy)., Design: retrospective epidemiological study., Setting and Participants: data regarding the patient load of the Surgical Urgencies/Emergencies flows (SUEs) of the Local Health Authority of the Autonomous Province of Trento derived from the Hospital Discharge Record (HDR) information flow. The population in study was that of patients hospitalized in the entire Province of Trento. This study compares the volume and characteristics of urgent/emergency surgery during the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic with the homologous period in 2019, subdividing the analysed pandemic period in 3 separated groups: • phase I (March-May 2020); • phase II (June-August 2020); • phase III (October-December 2020). The 3 groups represent, respectively: the 1st pandemic wave proclamation of national lockdown from 9 March to 18 May; the summer pandemic remission; the 2nd pandemic wave with partial restrictions on circulation and commercial activities. Clinical and surgical records of SUE population among these 3 periods (March-May; June-August; October-December) of both 2020 and 2019 were analyzed and compared., Main Outcome Measures: the overall number of admissions and surgical rates for SUEs in the study periods were chosen as primary outcomes. The same outcomes were analysed for the most represented diagnoses in the SUEs population: diverticulitis, intestinal obstruction, appendicitis, cholecystitis, gastrointestinal (GI) perforations, pancreatitis, traumas. To assess the degree of clinical picture severity, variables coming from the hospital discharging charts, commonly associated to worst outcomes in term of mortality and morbidity, such as age, length of hospital stay, DRG weight, and patients not discharged at home were extrapolated from the electronic database. A numerical weight was then assigned to each variable, obtaining a scoring system from 0 to 15 (severity index)., Results: the number of admissions for SUEs in the studied period showed a sinusoidal trend, with a dramatic decrease in phase I and III (-46.6% and -31.6%, respectively). This trend was also observed even by stratifying admissions for the most frequent pathologies, except for gastrointestinal perforations and pancreatitis. The surgical rate among hospitalised patients for SUEs was 35.2% in phase, significantly higher than that of 2019 (25.6%). Considering the most frequent diagnoses individually, some had a progressive increase in the surgical rate in phases I and II (diverticulitis, bowel obstructions, cholecystitis), others showed an initial decrease and then settled on values ​​not far from those of 2019 (GI perforations and appendicitis), others again had an initial significant increase and then gradually returned to values ​​similar to those of 2019 in phase III (traumas). The mean patients age was significantly higher in phase I than in 2019 (p-value <0.001) and in phase II (p-value <0.05). Consistently with the trend of the number of urgent admissions, even the severity index calculated on the SUEs population showed a sinusoidal trend with and evident increase during the two pandemic waves., Conclusions: the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on SUEs was mainly indirect, manifesting itself with a significant reduction in surgical admissions, particularly in phases I and III. Conversely, in the same phases, the surgical rate showed a significant increase compared to 2019. The stratified analysis confirmed these findings for the most frequent diagnoses except for GI perforations and pancreatitis. The clinical pictures were more severe in the two pandemic waves than in the reference period of 2019. Although with a slight numerical attenuation, in general, the second pandemic wave confirmed the first one findings.