Search

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a modified CAL-WR.The use of segmental colectomy in patients with endoscopically unresectable colonic lesions results in significant morbidity and mortality. CAL-WR is an alternative procedure that may reduce morbidity.This prospective multicenter study was performed in 13 Dutch hospitals between January 2017 and December 2019. Inclusion criteria were (1) colonic lesions inaccessible using current endoscopic resection techniques (judged by an expert panel), (2) non-lifting residual/recurrent adenomatous tissue after previous polypectomy or (3) an undetermined resection margin after endoscopic removal of a low-risk pathological T1 (pT1) colon carcinoma. Thirty-day morbidity, technical success rate and radicality were evaluated.Of the 118 patients included (56% male, mean age 66 years, standard deviation ± 8 years), 66 (56%) had complex lesions unsuitable for endoscopic removal, 34 (29%) had non-lifting residual/recurrent adenoma after previous polypectomy and 18 (15%) had uncertain resection margins after polypectomy of a pT1 colon carcinoma. CAL-WR was technically successful in 93% and R0 resection was achieved in 91% of patients. Minor complications (Clavien-Dindo i-ii) were noted in 7 patients (6%) and an additional oncologic segmental resection was performed in 12 cases (11%). Residual tissue at the scar was observed in 5% of patients during endoscopic follow-up.CAL-WR is an effective, organ-preserving approach that results in minor complications and circumvents the need for major surgery. CAL-WR, therefore, deserves consideration when endoscopic excision of circumscribed lesions is impossible or incomplete.

Objective: To assess potentially modifiable perioperative risk factors for anastomotic leakage in adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Summary Background Data: Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) is the single most important denominator of postoperative outcome after colorectal surgery. To lower the risk of CAL, the current research focused on the association of potentially modifiable risk factors, both surgical and anesthesiological. Methods: A consecutive series of adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery with primary anastomosis was enrolled from January 2016 to December 2018. Fourteen hospitals in Europe and Australia prospectively collected perioperative data by carrying out the LekCheck, a short checklist carried out in the operating theater as a time-out procedure just prior to the creation of the anastomosis to check perioperative values on 1) general condition 2) local perfusion and oxygenation, 3) contamination, and 4) surgery related factors. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis were performed to identify perioperative potentially modifiable risk factors for CAL. Results: There were 1562 patients included in this study. CAL was reported in 132 (8.5%) patients. Low preoperative hemoglobin (OR 5.40, P < 0.001), contamination of the operative field (OR 2.98, P < 0.001), hyperglycemia (OR 2.80, P = 0.003), duration of surgery of more than 3 hours (OR 1.86, P = 0.010), administration of vasopressors (OR 1.80, P = 0.010), inadequate timing of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis (OR 1.62, P = 0.047), and application of epidural analgesia (OR, 1.81, P = 0. 014) were all associated with CAL. Conclusions: This study identified 7 perioperative potentially modifiable risk factors for CAL. The results enable the development of a multimodal and multidisciplinary strategy to create an optimal perioperative condition to finally lower CAL rates.

Item does not contain fulltext 01 januari 2023

Background The role of diverting ileostomy in total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis is debated. The aim of this study is to gain insight in the clinical consequences of a diverting ileostomy, with respect to stoma rate at one year and stoma-related morbidity. Methods Patients undergoing TME with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 in eleven participating hospitals were included. Retrospectively, two groups were compared: patients with or without diverting ileostomy construction during primary surgery. Primary endpoint was stoma rate at one year. Secondary endpoints were severity and rate of anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate within thirty days and stoma (reversal) related morbidity. Results In 353 out of 595 patients (59.3%) a diverting ileostomy was constructed during primary surgery. Stoma rate at one year was 9.9% in the non-ileostomy group and 18.7% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.003). After correction for confounders, multivariate analysis showed that the construction of a diverting ileostomy during primary surgery was an independent risk factor for stoma at one year (OR 2.563 (95%CI 1.424–4.611), p = 0.002). Anastomotic leakage rate was 17.8% in the non-ileostomy group and 17.2% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.913). Overall 30-days morbidity rate was 37.6% in the non-ileostomy group and 56.1% in the ileostomy group (p Conclusions The stoma rate at one year was higher in patients with ileostomy construction during primary surgery. The incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage were not reduced by construction of an ileostomy. The morbidity related to the presence and reversal of a diverting ileostomy was substantial.

Aim A prolonged interval (>4 weeks) between short-course radiotherapy (25 Gy in five fractions) (SCRT-delay) and total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer has been associated with a decreased postoperative complication rate and offers the possibility of organ preservation in the case of a complete tumour response. This prospective cohort study systematically evaluated patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity for 8 weeks following SCRT-delay. Method Patients who were referred for SCRT-delay for intermediate risk, oligometastatic or locally advanced rectal cancer were included. Repeated measurements were done for patient-reported bowel dysfunction (measured by the low anterior resection syndrome [LARS] questionnaire and categorized as no, minor or major LARS) and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity (according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0) before start of treatment (baseline), at completion of SCRT and 1, 2, 3, 4, 6 and 8 weeks thereafter. Results Fifty-one patients were included; 31 (61%) were men and the median age was 67 years (range 44-91). Patient-reported bowel dysfunction and physician-reported radiation-induced toxicity peaked at weeks 1-2 after completion of SCRT and gradually declined thereafter. Major LARS was reported by 44 patients (92%) at some time during SCRT-delay. Grade 3 radiation-induced toxicity was reported in 17 patients (33%) and concerned predominantly diarrhoea. No Grade 4-5 radiation-induced toxicity occurred. Conclusion During SCRT-delay, almost every patient experiences temporary mild-moderate radiation-induced toxicity and major LARS, but life-threatening toxicity is rare. SCRT-delay is a safe alternative to SCRT-direct surgery that should be proposed when counselling rectal cancer patients on neoadjuvant strategies.

The role of diverting ileostomy in total mesorectal excision (TME) for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis is debated. The aim of this study is to gain insight in the clinical consequences of a diverting ileostomy, with respect to stoma rate at one year and stoma-related morbidity.Patients undergoing TME with primary anastomosis for rectal cancer between 2015 and 2017 in eleven participating hospitals were included. Retrospectively, two groups were compared: patients with or without diverting ileostomy construction during primary surgery. Primary endpoint was stoma rate at one year. Secondary endpoints were severity and rate of anastomotic leakage, overall morbidity rate within thirty days and stoma (reversal) related morbidity.In 353 out of 595 patients (59.3%) a diverting ileostomy was constructed during primary surgery. Stoma rate at one year was 9.9% in the non-ileostomy group and 18.7% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.003). After correction for confounders, multivariate analysis showed that the construction of a diverting ileostomy during primary surgery was an independent risk factor for stoma at one year (OR 2.563 (95%CI 1.424-4.611), p = 0.002). Anastomotic leakage rate was 17.8% in the non-ileostomy group and 17.2% in the ileostomy group (p = 0.913). Overall 30-days morbidity rate was 37.6% in the non-ileostomy group and 56.1% in the ileostomy group (p 0.001). Stoma reversal related morbidity rate was 17.9%.The stoma rate at one year was higher in patients with ileostomy construction during primary surgery. The incidence and severity of anastomotic leakage were not reduced by construction of an ileostomy. The morbidity related to the presence and reversal of a diverting ileostomy was substantial.

The superiority of robot-assisted over laparoscopic total mesorectal excision has not been proven. Most studies do not consider the learning curve while comparing the surgical technique.This study aims to compare laparoscopic with robot-assisted total mesorectal excision performed by surgeons who completed the learning curve of the technique.This is a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched analysis.The study was performed in 2 large, dedicated robot-assisted hospitals and 5 large, dedicated laparoscopic hospitals.Patients were included if they underwent a robot-assisted or laparoscopic total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer with curative intent at a dedicated center for the minimally invasive technique between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2017.We compared robot-assisted with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision.The main outcome was conversion to laparotomy during surgery. Secondary outcomes were postoperative morbidity and positive circumferential resection margin.A total of 884 patients were included and, after matching, 315 patients per treatment group remained. Conversion was similar between laparoscopic and robot-assisted total mesorectal excision (4.4% vs 2.5% (p = 0.20)). Positive circumferential resection margin was equal (3.2% vs 4.4% (p = 0.41)). Overall morbidity was comparable as well, although a lower rate of wound infections was observed in the robot-assisted group (5.7% vs 1.9% (p = 0.01)). More primary anastomoses were constructed in the robot-assisted group (50.8% vs 68.3% (p0.001)). Finally, more open procedures were performed in dedicated laparoscopic centers, with an overrepresentation of cT4N+ tumors in this group.This is a retrospective multicenter cohort; however, propensity score matching was applied to control for confounding by indication.Robot-assisted and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision are equally safe in terms of short-term outcomes. However, with the robot-assisted approach, more primary anastomoses were constructed, and a lower wound infection rate was observed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B677.ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL ASISTIDA POR ROBOT VERSUS ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA: UNA PUNTUACIÓN DE PROPENSIÓN RETROSPECTIVA ANÁLISIS DE COHORTES EMPAREJADAS EN CENTROS EXPERIMENTADOS.No se ha demostrado la superioridad de la escisión mesorrectal total asistida por robot sobre la laparoscópica. La mayoría de los estudios no tienen en cuenta la curva de aprendizaje al comparar la técnica quirúrgica.Este estudio tiene como objetivo comparar la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica con la asistida por robot realizada por cirujanos que completaron la curva de aprendizaje de la técnica.Este es un análisis multicéntrico retrospectivo emparejado por puntuación de propensión.El estudio se realizó en dos grandes hospitales dedicados asistidos por robots y cinco grandes hospitales laparoscópicos dedicados.Se incluyeron pacientes que se sometieron a escisión mesorrectal total asistida por robot o laparoscópica para cáncer de recto con intención curativa, en un centro dedicado a la técnica mínimamente invasiva entre el 1 de enero de 2015 y el 31 de diciembre de 2017.Comparamos la escisión mesorrectal total asistida por robot con la laparoscópica.El principal resultado fue la conversión a laparotomía durante la cirugía. Los resultados secundarios fueron la morbilidad posoperatoria y el margen circunferencial positivo.Se incluyó a un total de 884 pacientes y, después de emparejar, quedaron 315 pacientes por grupo de tratamiento. La conversión fue similar entre la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica y asistida por robot (4,4% frente a 2,5% [p = 0,20]). El margen de resección circunferencial positivo fue igual (3,2% vs 4,4% [p = 0,41]). La morbilidad general también fue comparable, aunque se observó una menor tasa de infecciones de heridas en el grupo asistido por robot (5,7% frente a 1,9% [p = 0,01]). Se construyeron más anastomosis primarias en el grupo asistido por robot (50,8% frente a 68,3% [p0,001]). Finalmente, se realizaron procedimientos más abiertos en centros laparoscópicos dedicados, con una sobrerrepresentación de tumores cT4N + en este grupo.Ésta es una cohorte multicéntrica retrospectiva; sin embargo, se aplicó el emparejamiento por puntuación de propensión para controlar los factores de confusión por indicación.La escisión mesorrectal total asistida por robot y laparoscópica son igualmente seguras en términos de resultados a corto plazo. Sin embargo, con el abordaje asistido por robot, se construyeron más anastomosis primarias y se observó una menor tasa de infección de la herida. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B677. (Traducción-Dr. Gonzalo Hagerman).

Background The use of self-monitoring devices is promising for improving perioperative physical activity and nutritional intake. Objective This study aimed to assess the feasibility, usability, and acceptability of a physical activity tracker and digital food record in persons scheduled for colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Methods This observational cohort study was conducted at a large training hospital between November 2019 and November 2020. The study population consisted of persons with CRC between 18- and 75 years of age who were able to use a smartphone or tablet and scheduled for elective surgery with curative intent. Excluded were persons not proficient in Dutch or following a protein-restricted diet. Participants used an activity tracker (Fitbit Charge 3) from 4 weeks before until 6 weeks after surgery. In the week before surgery (preoperative) and the fifth week after surgery (postoperative), participants also used a food record for 1 week. They shared their experience regarding usability (system usability scale, range 0-100) and acceptability (net promoter score, range –100 to +100). Results In total, 28 persons were included (n=16, 57% male, mean age 61, SD 8 years), and 27 shared their experiences. Scores regarding the activity tracker were as follows: preoperative median system usability score, 85 (IQR 73-90); net promoter score, +65; postoperative median system usability score, 78 (IQR 68-85); net promotor score, +67. The net promoter scores regarding the food record were +37 (preoperative) and–7 (postoperative). Conclusions The perioperative use of a physical activity tracker is considered feasible, usable, and acceptable by persons with CRC in this study. Preoperatively, the use of a digital food record was acceptable, and postoperatively, the acceptability decreased.

Contains fulltext : 177273.pdf (Publisher’s version ) (Open Access) BACKGROUND: Medical care for admitted patients in hospitals is increasingly reallocated to physician assistants (PAs). There is limited evidence about the consequences for the quality and safety of care. This study aimed to determine the effects of substitution of inpatient care from medical doctors (MDs) to PAs on patients' length of stay (LOS), quality and safety of care, and patient experiences with the provided care. METHODS: In a multicenter matched-controlled study, the traditional model in which only MDs are employed for inpatient care (MD model) was compared with a mixed model in which besides MDs also PAs are employed (PA/MD model). Thirty-four wards were recruited across the Netherlands. Patients were followed from admission till one month after discharge. Primary outcome measure was patients' LOS. Secondary outcomes concerned eleven indicators for quality and safety of inpatient care and patients' experiences with the provided care. RESULTS: Data on 2,307 patients from 34 hospital wards was available. The involvement of PAs was not significantly associated with LOS (beta 1.20, 95%CI 0.99-1.40, p = .062). None of the indicators for quality and safety of care were different between study arms. However, the involvement of PAs was associated with better experiences of patients (beta 0.49, 95% CI 0.22-0.76, p = .001). CONCLUSIONS: This study did not find differences regarding LOS and quality of care between wards on which PAs, in collaboration with MDs, provided medical care for the admitted patients, and wards on which only MDs provided medical care. Employing PAs seems to be safe and seems to lead to better patient experiences. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01835444.

Background. The purpose of this study was to determine construct and face validities of an interactive Web-based module for pneumoperitoneum and insufflator. Methods. Participants were recruited from surgical departments in 2 academic hospitals and 1 large nonacademic teaching hospital. They were stratified into 3 groups based on their laparoscopic experience (A, no experience; B, experience as assistant; and C, experience as primary surgeon). Within each group the participants were randomized into a training subgroup and a control subgroup. All participants performed a theoretical and a practical test. The training participants first completed the module before they performed the tests. The control participants immediately performed the tests. Results were compared between the training and control participants. All training participants filled out a questionnaire on their opinion about the module. Results. In total, 40 participants were enrolled in the study: group A consisted of 20 participants and groups B and C both consisted of 10 participants. The trained participants answered significantly more theoretical questions correctly (8.3 vs 6.6; P < .001), correctly identified more alarm causes (91% vs 86%; P = .014) and made significantly less errors in the practical test (1.5 vs 3.6; P = .001). All 20 trained participants rated the module fairly good and indicated the module to be of additive value to surgical training programs. Conclusions. Training with the interactive web-based module on installation of a pneumoperitoneum and use of an insufflator has a positive effect on both theoretical and practical competence. Construct and face validities were established for this module.

The role of technology in healthcare is constantly increasing. Training with equipment in healthcare does not seem to be as strictly organized as in other industries. The purpose of this paper is to describe the differences in organization and management of equipment-related training between a petrochemical company and a hospital, in order to extract information that can be incorporated into a hospital’s safety management system. Interviews were held at a petrochemical plant of one of the world’s largest companies and at a large non-academic teaching hospital, both in The Netherlands. At the petrochemical company, 2 learning advisors were interviewed, responsible for the content of training programs for operators. At the hospital, interviews were held with 2 educational coordinators and a team leader of the operating department. At the petrochemical company competencies are defined for every job including accompanying training sessions and assessments, followed by certification. All training and certification is mandatory. There is a separate department responsible for all education within the company and all competencies and certification are registered electronically. At the hospital training is not organized as strictly. Equipment-related training is not mandatory and, except for laparoscopic operating equipment, not repeated regularly. Assessment and certification of personnel does not take place. Equipment-related training and assessment in hospitals could be organized more strictly. The petrochemical industry can be used as an example of a sector in which this development has already taken place. To establish such changes, sharpening of legislation and regulations by governmental bodies is of fundamental importance.

Background Surgeons are increasingly being scrutinized for their performance and there is growing interest in objective assessment of technical skills. The purpose of this study was to review all evidence for these methods, in order to provide a guideline for use in clinical practice. Methods A systematic search was performed using PubMed and Web of Science for studies addressing the validity and reliability of methods for objective skills assessment within surgery and gynaecology only. The studies were assessed according to the Oxford Centre for Evidence-based Medicine levels of evidence. Results In total 104 studies were included, of which 20 (19·2 per cent) had a level of evidence 1b or 2b. In 28 studies (26·9 per cent), the assessment method was used in the operating room. Virtual reality simulators and Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) have been studied most. Although OSATS is seen as the standard for skills assessment, only seven studies, with a low level of evidence, addressed its use in the operating room. Conclusion Based on currently available evidence, most methods of skills assessment are valid for feedback or measuring progress of training, but few can be used for examination or credentialing. The purpose of the assessment determines the choice of method.

The objective of this study was to document the complications, outcomes and causes of obstetric fistulas in East African women who underwent first-time surgical repair. Attention was also paid to social background and characteristics of the patients. Data were collected prospectively from patients operated on in the period from January 2001 to August 2003. Only patients who received first-time surgery and whose fistula had been caused by obstructed labour were included in the study. Eight hundred eighty-eight patients received fistula-related surgical treatment. A total of 639 of the patients with 647 fistulas underwent first-time repair. Our study comprised the 581 (90.9%) patients whose fistulas had been caused by obstructed labour. Their mean age was 27 years, 70% were shorter than 156 cm, and 30.8% had completed primary education. In 45.1%, the fistula patient was primigravida; perinatal survival was 11.5%. Mean duration between onset of the fistula and surgical treatment was 36.4 months. In 40.6%, the fistula patients lived separated from their partner. Overall closure rate of the fistulas was 93.8%. No variables were identified for success of closure using a multivariate analysis. Patients operated on within 3 months had a slightly better surgical outcome 93.9% versus 87.0%. Our population of East African obstetric fistula patients shared most of the demographic and physical features of fistula patients in the rest of the African continent. Early surgical repair (

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the best treatment of incisional hernia, taking into account recurrence, complications, discomfort, cosmetic result, and patient satisfaction. BACKGROUND: Long-term results of incisional hernia repair are lacking. Retrospective studies and the midterm results of this study indicate that mesh repair is superior to suture repair. However, many surgeons are still performing suture repair. METHODS: Between 1992 and 1998, a multicenter trial was performed, in which 181 eligible patients with a primary or first-time recurrent midline incisional hernia were randomly assigned to suture or mesh repair. In 2003, follow-up was updated. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 75 months for suture repair and 81 months for mesh repair patients. The 10-year cumulative rate of recurrence was 63% for suture repair and 32% for mesh repair (P < 0.001). Abdominal aneurysm (P = 0.01) and wound infection (P = 0.02) were identified as independent risk factors for recurrence. In patients with small incisional hernias, the recurrence rates were 67% after suture repair and 17% after mesh repair (P = 0.003). One hundred twenty-six patients completed long-term follow-up (median follow-up 98 months). In the mesh repair group, 17% suffered a complication, compared with 8% in the suture repair group (P = 0.17). Abdominal pain was more frequent in suture repair patients (P = 0.01), but there was no difference in scar pain, cosmetic result, and patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Mesh repair results in a lower recurrence rate and less abdominal pain and does not result in more complications than suture repair. Suture repair of incisional hernia should be abandoned.

Background. This study aims to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic skills courses on the knowledge of laparoscopic equipment. Methods. A knowledge test on laparoscopic equipment was developed, and participants of 3 separate basic laparoscopic skills courses in the Netherlands completed the test at the beginning and end of these courses. All lectures and demonstrations during the courses were recorded on video to assess the matching of its contents with the items in the test. As a reference, the test was also completed by a group of laparoscopic experts by e-mail. Results. In total, 36 participants (64.3%) completed both the pretest and posttest. Overall, the mean test score improved from 60.4% of the maximum possible score for the pretest to 68.4% for the posttest. There were no significant differences in test scores between the 3 separate courses. However, the actual content varied among the courses. The correspondence of the test items with the course content varied from 47% to 69%. Although 30% of the participants had already received training for laparoscopic equipment in their own hospital, 92.5% wanted to receive more training. 28 experts completed the test with a mean score of 75.7%, which was significantly better than the posttest score of the course participants. Conclusions. The laparoscopic skills courses evaluated in this study had a modest positive effect on the acquisition of knowledge about laparoscopic equipment. Variance exists among their contents.

Descriptive study.Between June and August 2011 all Dutch hospitals were contacted for a survey by telephone. The questionnaire consisted of 19 questions, partly concerned with the use of checklists, partly with training in the use of laparoscopic equipment.In total 89 of 91 Dutch hospitals responded to the questionnaire: 8 academic hospitals, 44 peripheral teaching hospitals and 37 general hospitals. Fifty hospitals (56.2%) used a checklist for laparoscopic operating equipment. The other 39 hospitals (43.8%) did not use a specific checklist for equipment, but performed a standard procedure to check the equipment. The level of detail differed among the different checklists: in 9 of the 50 checklists the different devices were not identified separately and in half of the checklists there were no checks on the connection of the equipment. Training with operating equipment took place in 87 hospitals (97.8%). In 33 hospitals this happened only when new equipment was introduced, but in the other hospitals training took place more frequently. This training was mandatory in 58 hospitals (66.7%).The use of detailed checklists for the use of laparoscopic operating equipment was not found to be standard in all Dutch hospitals. However, all hospitals do have a general procedure for pre-use checking of equipment, but the results are not everywhere formally documented. Training with operating equipment was not mandatory in one third of the surveyed hospitals.