No abstract

LIR is safe and effective with low perioperative morbidity and mortality. The use of laparoscopy as an option in terms of concomitant hernia repair and lysis of adhesions may be considered in selected patients.

Rectal surgery continues to be an area of advancement for minimally invasive techniques. However, there is controversy regarding whether a robotic approach imparts any advantages over established laparoscopic procedures. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare outcomes of laparoscopic and robotic rectal resection operations. A single-institution retrospective review was performed identifying 83 consecutive patients undergoing low rectal resection requiring proximal diversion between 2009 and 2013. The cohort was comprised of 38 laparoscopic and 45 robotic cases. Data were analyzed for postoperative outcomes as well as 30-day morbidity and mortality. Male gender frequency, body mass index, and American Society of Anesthesiologists class were higher in the robotic group (71%, 28.6 kg/m2, and 2.6, respectively) compared with the laparoscopic group (42%, 23.7 kg/m2, and 2.2, respectively; P < 0.01). Length of stay was significantly longer for patients undergoing laparoscopic (7.5 days) compared with robotic procedures (5.7 days, P < 0.01). This difference was even greater when comparing patients who underwent a hybrid laparoscopic-assisted open total mesorectal excision (TME) with robotic TME (8.2 vs 5.7 days, respectively, P < 0.01). Conversion rate was 7.9 per cent for the laparoscopic group and zero per cent for the robotic ( P = 0.09). There were no mortalities in either group. A pure laparoscopic or robotic rectal surgery may be associated with a shorter hospital stay compared with a laparoscopic-assisted approach.

Hernia formation after surgical procedures continues to be an important cause of surgical morbidity. Incisional reinforcement at the time of the initial operation has been used in some patient populations to reduce the risk of subsequent hernia formation. In this article, reinforcement techniques in different surgical wounds are examined to identify situations in which hernia formation may be prevented. Mesh use for midline closure, pelvic floor reconstruction, and stoma site reinforcement is discussed. Additionally, the use of retention sutures, closure of the open abdomen, and reinforcement after component separation are examined using current literature. Although existing studies do not support the routine use of mesh reinforcement for all surgical incisions, certain patient populations appear to benefit from reinforcement with lower rates of subsequent hernia formation. The identification and characterization of these groups will guide the future use of mesh reinforcement in surgical incisions.

Aim: Robust data demonstrate that enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) decrease length of stay, complications and cost. However, little is known about the reasons for variation in compliance with ERPs. The aim of this work was to confirm the efficacy of ERPs in a regional network, and to determine factors that are associated with ERP delivery in diverse hospital settings.Method: A prospective cohort of patients was created by recording all elective colorectal operations at hospitals in the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP). The delivery of 12 ERP components was tracked at all sites, and factors associated with ERP component delivery and affecting outcomes were reported. Results: From 2016 to 2019, 9274 elective colorectal operations were performed at 36 hospitals. Indications were 48% cancer, 23% diverticulitis and 8% inflammatory bowel disease. Minimally invasive surgery was used in 71%. The proportion of cases with six or more ERP components received increased from 23% in 2016 to 50% in 2019. An increase in components was associated with a shorter length of stay and fewer combined adverse events and reinterventions. Further, increasing numbers of ERP components provided an incremental benefit to patients even when delivered in a low-volume centre or by a lowvolume surgeon, and regardless of patient presentation. Conclusion:At SCOAP hospitals, the delivery of increasing numbers of ERP components was associated with improved perioperative outcomes and decreased complications after elective colorectal surgery. The variation in delivery of these evidence-based components in subsets of our cohort indicates an important opportunity for quality improvement initiatives.