The aim of this systematic review is to identify patient-related, perioperative and technical risk factors for esophago-jejunal anastomotic leakage (EJAL) in patients undergoing total gastrectomy for gastric cancer (GC). A comprehensive literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus databases was performed. Studies providing factors predictive of EJAL by uni- and multivariate analysis or an estimate of association between EJAL and related risk factors were included. All studies were assessed for methodological quality, and a narrative synthesis of the results was performed. A total of 16 studies were included in the systematic review, with a total of 42,489 patients who underwent gastrectomy with esophago-jejunal anastomosis. Age, BMI, impaired respiratory function, prognostic nutritional index (PNI), alcohol consumption, chronic renal failure, diabetes and mixed-type histology were identified as patient-related risk factors for EJAL at multivariate analysis. Likewise, among operative factors, laparoscopic approach, anastomosis type, additional organ resection, blood loss, intraoperative time and surgeon experience were found to be predictive factors for the development of EJAL. In clinical setting, we are able to identify several risk factors for EJAL. This can improve the recognition of higher-risk patients and their outcomes.

Purpose: To evaluate safety and efficacy of a mesh reinforcement following stoma reversal to prevent stoma site incisional hernia (SSIH) and differences across the prostheses used. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify comparative studies until September 2020. A meta-analysis of postoperative outcomes and a network meta-analysis for a multiple comparison of the prostheses with each other were performed. Results: Seven studies were included in the analysis (78.4% ileostomy and 21.6% colostomy) with a total of 1716 patients with (n = 684) or without (n = 1032) mesh. Mesh placement was associated with lower risk of SSIH (7.8%vs18.1%, OR0.266,95% CI 0.123–0.577, p < 0.001) than no mesh procedures but also with a longer operative time (SMD 0.941, 95% CI 0.462–1.421, p < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of Surgical Site infection (11.5% vs 11.1%, OR 1.074, 95% CI 0.78–1.48, p = 0.66), seroma formation (4.4% vs 7.1%, OR 1.052, 95% CI 0.64–1.73, p = 0.84), anastomotic leakage (3.7% vs 2.7%, OR 1.598, 95% CI 0.846–3.019, p = 0.149) and length of stay (SMD − 0.579,95% CI − 1.261 to 0.102, p = 0.096) between mesh and no mesh groups. Use of prosthesis was associated with a significant lower need for a reoperation than no mesh group (8.1% vs 12.1%, OR 0.332, 95% CI 0.119–0.930, p = 0.036). Incidence of seroma is lower with biologic than polypropylene meshes but they showed a trend towards poor results compared with polypropylene or biosynthetic meshes. Conclusion: Despite longer operative time, mesh prophylactic reinforcement at the site of stoma seems a safe and effective procedure with lower incidence of SSIH, need for reoperation and comparable short-term outcomes than standard closure technique. A significant superiority of a specific mesh type was not identified.

Background: Tailgut cysts are rare congenital lesions that develop in the presacral space. As they can potentially conceal primary neuroendocrine tumors, surgical excision is suggested as the treatment of choice. However, specific management guidelines have yet to be developed. A posterior approach is usually preferred for cysts extending to the third sacral vertebral body. Conversely, a transabdominal approach is preferred for lesions extending upward to achieve an optimal view of the surgical field and avoid injuries. Case report: Here, we report a case of a 48-year-old man suffering from perianal pain and constipation. Digital rectal examination and magnetic resonance imaging revealed a presacral mass below the third sacral vertebral body. A laparoscopic transabdominal presacral tumor excision was performed. The final histological diagnosis was a rare primary neuroendocrine tumor arising from a tailgut cyst. The postoperative course was uneventful, and no signs of recurrence were observed at the six-month follow-up. Conclusions: This study may help establish more well-grounded recommendations for the surgical management of rectal tumors, demonstrating that the laparoscopic transabdominal technique is safe and feasible, even for lesions below the third sacral vertebral body. This approach provided an adequate view of the presacral space, facilitating the preservation of cyst integrity, which is essential in cases of malignant pathologies.

Anastomotic leakage is the most-feared complication of rectal surgery. Transanal devices have been suggested for anastomotic protection as an alternative to defunctioning stoma, although evidence is conflicting, and no single device is widely used in clinical practice. The aim of this paper is to investigate the safety and efficacy of a transanal tube for the prevention of leakage following laparoscopic rectal cancer resection. A transanal tube was used in the cases of total mesorectal excision with low colorectal or coloanal anastomosis, undamaged doughnuts, and negative intraoperative air-leak test. The transanal tube was kept in place until the seventh postoperative day. A total of 195 consecutive patients were retrieved from a prospective surgical database and included in the study. Of these, 71.8% received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The perioperative mortality rate was 1.0%. Anastomotic leakage occurred in 19 patients, accounting for an incidence rate of 9.7%. Among these, 13 patients underwent re-laparoscopy and ileostomy, while 6 patients were managed conservatively. Overall, the stoma rate was 6.7%. The use of a transanal tube may be a suitable strategy for anastomotic protection following restorative rectal cancer resection. This approach could avoid the burden of a stoma in selected patients with low anastomoses.

The aim of these evidence-based guidelines is to present a consensus position from members of the Italian Unitary Society of Colon-Proctology (SIUCP: Società Italiana Unitaria di Colonproctologia) on the diagnosis and management of obstructed defecation syndrome (ODS), with the purpose of guiding physicians in the selection of the most appropriate treatment option. A panel of experts was appointed by the Board of the SIUCP to develop key questions addressing the main topics related to the management of ODS and to perform an accurate literature search for each topic, in order to provide evidence-based answers and to summarize them in structured statements. All clinical questions were discussed by the expert panel over multiple rounds using the Delphi approach, and consensus among the experts was achieved for each statement. The questions were formulated according to PICO (patients, intervention, comparison, outcome) criteria, and the statements were developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) methodology. In patients with ODS refractory to first-line medical therapy, rehabilitation may be considered as a therapeutic option, particularly in cases of dyssynergic defecation, whereas a surgical approach may be indicated in patients with a high symptom score and an Oxford prolapse grade system score ≥3 on defecography (using magnetic resonance imaging or another modality). Surgical options include stapled transanal rectal resection and ventral mesh rectopexy, eventually combined, respectively, with pelvic organ prolapse suspension and sacrocolpopexy in the presence of multicompartment pelvic prolapse. A transverse perineal support procedure may be considered in the presence of excessive perineal descent. In patients with recurrent symptoms after surgery, transanal irrigation may represent a useful therapeutic option.

Background: Although the laparoscopic approach is considered the gold standard for elective splenectomy, it is still debated whether the underlying disease affects postoperative outcomes. Given the importance of good patient selection in the early stages of the learning curve for laparoscopic splenectomy (LS), this study aimed to compare the postoperative outcomes following LS for malignant diseases and benign diseases (MDs and BDs). Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent LS was performed at 2 different institutions between January 2013 and September 2020. Patients were classified into 2 groups based on the underlying BDs or MDs, and the 30 days postoperative outcomes were compared. Risk factors for overall complications were determined using logistic regression analysis. Results: LS was performed for BDs and MDs in 51 (67%) and 25 (33%) patients, respectively. The overall morbidity rate and the intraoperative and postoperative complication rates were significantly higher in the MD group (P24.9, the long axis of the spleen >16 cm, and spleen weight >600 g were significantly associated with increased postoperative morbidity. Conclusion: In addition to the underlying disease, preoperative conditions may also affect the complication rates after LS. These findings may be helpful in patient selection, especially in the early stages of the learning curve for minimally invasive splenectomies.