Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of elective rectal resection for rectal cancer in adults by robotic surgery compared with conventional laparoscopic surgery. Summary of Background Data: Technological advantages of robotic surgery favor precise dissection in narrow spaces. However, the evidence base driving recommendations for the use of robotic surgery in rectal cancer primarily hinges on observational data. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL for randomized controlled trials (until August 2016) comparing robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopic surgery. Data on the following endpoints were evaluated: circumferential margin status, mesorectal grade, number of lymph nodes harvested, rate of conversion to open surgery, postoperative complications, and operative time. Data were summarized as relative risks (RR) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Risk of bias of studies was assessed with standard methods. Results: Five trials were eligible, including 334 robotic and 337 laparoscopic surgery cases. Meta-analysis showed that RS was associated with lower conversion rate (7.3%; 4 studies, 544 participants, RR 0.58; 95% CI 0.35–0.97, P = 0.04, I² = 0%) and longer operating time (MD 38.43 minutes, 95% CI 31.84–45.01: P < 0.00001) compared with laparoscopic surgery. Perioperative mortality, rate of circumferential margin involvement (2 studies, 489 participants, RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.39–1.73), and lymph nodes collected (mean 17.4 Lymph Nodes; 5 trials, 674 patients, MD −0.35, 95% CI −1.83 to 1.12) were similar. The quality of the evidence was moderate for most outcomes. Conclusion: Evidence of moderate quality supports that robotic surgery for rectal cancer produces similar perioperative outcomes of oncologic procedure adequacy to conventional laparoscopic surgery. Robotic surgery portraits lower rate of conversion to open surgery, while operating time is significantly longer than by laparoscopic approach.

Objective: To identify the prognostic variables that predict disease-specific survival and second local recurrence-free survival in patients with recurrent retroperitoneal liposarcoma so as to guide clinical management. Summary Background Data: Local recurrence after complete resection of primary retroperitoneal liposarcoma is a common clinical problem that frequently leads to morbidity and mortality. Factors that determine survival in patients with a local recurrence after complete resection of the primary and rerecurrence after resection of the first local recurrence have not been clearly defined. Methods: From a prospective sarcoma database we selected 105 patients who had at least one local recurrence following complete resection of a primary retroperitoneal liposarcoma between July 1982 and December 2005. Of these patients, 61 underwent complete resection of their first local recurrence. Study endpoints included second local recurrence-free survival for these 61 patients and disease-specific survival for all 105 patients. Univariate analysis was performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test, and multivariate analysis with the Cox proportional hazards model and score test. Local recurrence growth rate was defined as the radiographic size of the local recurrence divided by the time to local recurrence from the primary resection. Results: Median follow-up was 65 months. Local recurrence size, primary histologic variant and grade, and local recurrence growth rate were independent predictors of disease-specific survival. For those undergoing reresection, local recurrence size and local recurrence growth rate independently influenced development of a second local recurrence. Only patients with local recurrence growth rates of less than 0.9 cm/mo were associated with improved survival after aggressive resection of the local recurrence. Conclusions: Local recurrence growth rate is strongly associated with disease-specific survival and local control for patients with completely resected locally recurrent retroperitoneal liposarcoma. Despite aggressive operative management patients with a local recurrence growth rate greater than 0.9 cm/mo were associated with poor outcomes and should be considered for enrollment in clinical trials employing novel agents.

Background: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is considered the gold standard for the treatment of gallbladder lithiasis; nevertheless, the incidence of bile duct injuries (BDI) is still high (0.3–0.8%) compared to open cholecystectomy (0.2%). In 1995, Strasberg introduced the "Critical View of Safety" (CVS) to reduce the risk of BDI. Despite its widespread use, the scientific evidence supporting this technique to prevent BDI is controversial. Methods: Between March 2017 and March 2019, the data of patients submitted to laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 30 Italian surgical departments were collected on a national database. A survey was submitted to all members of Italian Digestive Pathology Society to obtain data on the preoperative workup, the surgical and postoperative management of patients and to judge, at the end of the procedure, if the isolation of the elements was performed according to the CVS. In the case of a declared critical view, iconographic documentation was obtained, finally reviewed by an external auditor. Results: Data from 604 patients were analysed. The study population was divided into two groups according to the evidence (Group A; n = 11) or absence (Group B; N = 593) of BDI and perioperative bleeding. The non-use of CVS was found in 54.6% of procedures in the Group A, and 25.8% in the Group B, and evaluating the operator-related variables the execution of CVS was associated with a significantly lower incidence of BDI and intraoperative bleeding. Conclusions: The CVS confirmed to be the safest technique to recognize the elements of the Calot triangle and, if correctly performed, it significantly impacted on preventing intraoperative complications. Additional educational programs on the correct application of CVS in clinical practice would be desirable to avoid extreme conditions that may require additional procedures.

Parathyroid carcinoma is a rare neoplasm that may present sporadically or in the context of a genetic syndrome. Diagnosis and management are challenging due to the lack of clinical and pathological features that may reliably distinguish malignant from benign disease. From January 2013 to December 2017, from 358 consecutive patients affected by parathyroid diseases, 3 patients with parathyroid carcinoma were treated at our academic Department of General Surgery. We present our experience as illustrative of the different features of clinical presentation of parathyroid carcinoma and review its management considering the recent relevant literature. Case 1: A 62-year-old man was hospitalized for left-sided palpable neck mass, hypercalcemia and elevated PTH. US-guided FNA was suspect for parathyroid carcinoma. A large cystic mass was excised in bloc with total thyroidectomy and central neck dissection. Genetic studies framed a pathologically confirmed parathyroid carcinoma within MEN1 syndrome. Case 2: A 48-year-old woman with hypothyroidism had total thyroidectomy performed for a suspect for right follicular thyroid lesion. Pathology revealed parathyroid carcinoma. Case 3: A 47 year-old man was admitted for hypercalcaemic crisis and renal failure in the context of PHPT. A lesion suggestive on US and MIBI scan for parathyroid adenoma in the right lower position was removed by mini-invasive approach. Pathology revealed parathyroid cancer and patient had completion hemythyroidectomy and central neck dissection. Parathyroid cancer is a particularly rare endocrine malignancy, however it should be suspected in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism when severe hypercalcemia is associated to cervical mass, renal and skeletal disease. Parathyroid surgery remains the mainstay of treatment. Radical tumour resection and expedited treatment in a dedicated endocrine Center represent crucial prognostic factors.