Anastomotic leakage (AL) remains one of the most feared complications after rectal surgery for cancer, with stable incidence rates despite advances in surgical technique and perioperative care. Multiple anastomotic reinforcement strategies have been proposed, yet evidence remains heterogeneous and no clear consensus exists regarding their routine use. A structured expert position panel process was conducted. Eleven clinical scenarios based on AL risk factors and twenty thematic items addressing indications, devices, timing, contraindications, surgical approach, stoma use, costs, and expected outcomes were developed. A panel of experts evaluated each statement using a five-point Likert scale through a two-round process. Consensus was assessed using median scores and interquartile ranges (IQR). Consensus was not reached for most individual or combined preoperative risk factors. Most reinforcement techniques did not receive clear endorsement because of inconsistent and heterogeneous evidence. Strong agreement emerged regarding the central role of intraoperative assessment: tissue perfusion, mechanical tension, tissue quality, and unexpected technical difficulty were identified as key determinants. The panel agreed that reinforcement may still be appropriate in the presence of a diverting stoma, as diversion reduces clinical severity but does not prevent leakage or long-term sequelae. Surgical approach and material cost were not considered influent factors. This position statement highlights the lack of robust evidence supporting routine, indication-driven, or device-specific anastomotic reinforcement in rectal cancer surgery. The main shared recommendation was to base reinforcement on intraoperative surgical judgment, including tissue perfusion, tension, tissue quality, and unexpected technical difficulty.Keywords: anastomotic leakage, rectal cancer surgery, anastomotic reinforcement.

Colorectal cancer is the third most frequently diagnosed neoplasm in the world. Surgical resection is the cornerstone of therapy and the outcome is closely related to the quality of preoperative staging, surgical technique, occurrence of complications, and proper multidisciplinary treatment of the patient. The minimally invasive technique led to a significant reduction in general and local complications, but the most important and frequent local complication, anastomotic leakage (AL), is still an unresolved problem. This observational study aimed to evaluate the role of indexed oxygen delivery (DO2I) in the genesis of anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing elective laparoscopic resection surgery for colorectal cancer. Patients referred to the Department of General Surgery of the S. Eugenio Hospital in Rome, suffering from neoplasia of the colon-rectum, were enrolled. Intraoperatively, in addition to complete noninvasive monitoring, noninvasive hemodynamic monitoring was applied for cardiac output calculation. Non-invasive monitoring for oxyphoretic and haemoglobin calculation was also applied. The DO2I was calculated and the patients were divided into three groups (A, B, C). 3 cases of AL were observed. Patients who developed anastomotic leakage had lower than average DO2I values, in one case the lowest value observed in the entire series of cases. Patients with low DO2I had the highest incidence of postoperative surgical complications and anastomosis failure. Analysis of these data suggests a relationship between the incidence and severity of AL and the mean DO2I. A systematic proactive optimization of DO2I could be associated to a reduction of anastomotic leakage rate.

Incisional hernia after ileostomy closure is a complication that adversely affects patient outcomes, quality of life (QoL), healthcare resources, and related costs. Prophylactic mesh reinforcement, both biological and synthetic, has been shown to be safe and effective in preventing stoma site incisional hernia (SSIH). This study aimed to evaluate the use of a slowly absorbable biosynthetic mesh at the site of temporary ileostomy closure to prevent SSIH. This prospective, single-arm observational study was conducted across 14 Italian hospitals. Patients undergoing ileostomy reversal with retromuscular placement of a poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (Phasix™) mesh were enrolled. Endpoints included the incidence of radiologically and clinically detected SSIH at 1-year, postoperative morbidity, wound complications, and QoL assessed using the EuroQoL 5D-5 L and Carolinas Comfort Scale (CCS) questionnaires. A total of 115 patients completed at least 1 year of follow-up and were included in the analysis. Seromas was the most frequent complication (8.6

This study aimed to evaluate the FTR after laparoscopic colorectal surgery in an Italian high-volume centre. A retrospective analysis was conducted in a consecutive series of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery for neoplastic disease between January 2010 and December 2023 at the General Surgery Department of the San Eugenio Hospital, Rome, Italy. Patients were grouped by age in adult (vs. < 75 years) and elderly group (≥ 75 years). A multivariate analysis of the predictive factors of complications was performed. A total of 1,000 patients met the inclusion criteria, excluding those who underwent open or robotic surgery, either in emergency or elective settings. 53 patients (5.3%) experienced major complications. The mean age of patients with no or mild complications was 65.60 years (± 10.61), whereas patients with severe complications were older (69.94 years ± 12.02, p = 0.0041 ). Gender distribution and BMI do not represent a risk factor for major complications ( p = 0.2555 and p = 0.2686 , respectively), unlike the ASA score III or IV ( p = 0.0001 ). The overall FTR rate for adult patients is 9%, while it is slightly higher at 10% for elderly patients. No statistical differences were found between the 2 groups. Elderly patients had more frequent FTR due to infective complications, while the FTR rate for cardiovascular disease was more frequent in the adult group. Minimally invasive approach, skilled team, well-established rapid response and standardized complication management protocols can positively impact FTR regardless of patients' age.

Intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) are common surgical emergencies and are an important cause of morbidity and mortality in hospital settings, particularly if poorly managed. The cornerstones of effective IAIs management include early diagnosis, adequate source control, appropriate antimicrobial therapy, and early physiologic stabilization using intravenous fluids and vasopressor agents in critically ill patients. Adequate empiric antimicrobial therapy in patients with IAIs is of paramount importance because inappropriate antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor outcomes. Optimizing antimicrobial prescriptions improves treatment effectiveness, increases patients’ safety, and minimizes the risk of opportunistic infections (such as Clostridioides difficile) and antimicrobial resistance selection. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms has caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially regarding Gram-negative bacteria. The Multidisciplinary and Intersociety Italian Council for the Optimization of Antimicrobial Use promoted a consensus conference on the antimicrobial management of IAIs, including emergency medicine specialists, radiologists, surgeons, intensivists, infectious disease specialists, clinical pharmacologists, hospital pharmacists, microbiologists and public health specialists. Relevant clinical questions were constructed by the Organizational Committee in order to investigate the topic. The expert panel produced recommendation statements based on the best scientific evidence from PubMed and EMBASE Library and experts’ opinions. The statements were planned and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) hierarchy of evidence. On November 10, 2023, the experts met in Mestre (Italy) to debate the statements. After the approval of the statements, the expert panel met via email and virtual meetings to prepare and revise the definitive document. This document represents the executive summary of the consensus conference and comprises three sections. The first section focuses on the general principles of diagnosis and treatment of IAIs. The second section provides twenty-three evidence-based recommendations for the antimicrobial therapy of IAIs. The third section presents eight clinical diagnostic-therapeutic pathways for the most common IAIs. The document has been endorsed by the Italian Society of Surgery.

Colorectal cancer is a frequent neoplasm in western countries, mainly due to dietary and behavioral factors. Its incidence is growing in developing countries for the westernization of foods and lifestyles. An increased incidence rate is observed in patients under 45 years of age. In recent years, the mortality for CRC is decreased, but this trend is slowing. The mortality rate is reducing in those countries where prevention and treatments have been implemented. The survival is increased to over 65%. This trend reflects earlier detection of CRC through routine clinical examinations and screening, more accurate staging through advances in imaging, improvements in surgical techniques, and advances in chemotherapy and radiation. The most important predictor of survival is the stage at diagnosis. The screening programs are able to reduce incidence and mortality rates of CRC. The aim of this paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of incidence, mortality, and survival rate for CRC.

Introduction: Despite several perioperative care advancements and innovations in surgical procedures and technologies, the incidence rate of anastomotic leaks (ALs) after colorectal surgery has not substantially decreased. Gut microbiota can play a critical role in the healing process of anastomotic tissue and alterations in its composition may be largely to blame for anastomotic insufficiency. The use of specific antibiotics for preoperative large bowel decontamination could significantly influence the rate of ALs. The aim of this study was to systematically assess the various antibiotic prophylactic regimen strategies for primary prevention of ALs during colorectal surgery, in view of the available evidence. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, and randomized clinical trials (RCTs) analyzing prophylactic antibiotic bowel preparation in colorectal surgery were included. PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science Core Collection, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception through to 30 November 2022. The methodological quality of the included trials was evaluated. The primary outcome was AL rate; secondary outcomes were superficial/deep surgical site infections (SSIs). The PRISMA guidelines were used to carry out the present systematic review. Results: Thirteen RCTs published between 1977 and 2022, with a total of 4334 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Antibiotic prophylaxis was administered orally in 11/13 studies and intravenously in 2 studies. Patients randomly assigned to antibiotic prophylaxis, regardless of the regimen, had a reduced risk of ALs (p = 0.003) compared to mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) alone. The use of antibiotic prophylaxis was also more effective in significantly reducing SSIs (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The evidence points to an advantage of oral antibiotic prophylaxis in terms of AL rate, a significant contributor to perioperative morbidity, mortality, and rising healthcare expenditures. In light of such results, the use of antibiotic prophylaxis should be strongly encouraged prior to colorectal surgery.

This article reports the results of a novel perioperative treatment implementing the gut microbiota to prevent anastomotic fistula and leakage (AL) in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer and represents the continuation of our pilot study on 60 cases. A series of 131 patients underwent elective colorectal surgery at the S. Eugenio Hospital (Rome—Italy) between December 1, 2020, and November 30, 2022, and received a perioperative preparation following the Microbiota Implementation to Reduce Anastomotic Colorectal Leaks ( MIRACLe ) protocol comprising oral antibiotics, mechanical bowel preparation and perioperative probiotics. The results obtained in the MIRACLe group (MG) were compared to those registered in a Control group (CG) of 500 patients operated on between March 2015 and November 30, 2020, who received a standard ERAS protocol. Propensity score-matching (PSM) analysis was performed to overcome patients’ selection bias. Patients were categorised according to perioperative preparation (MIRACLe protocol vs standard ERAS protocol) into two groups: 118 patients were in post-matched MIRACLe group (pmMG) and 356 were in post-matched Control group (pmCG). In the pmMG, only 2 anastomotic leaks were registered, and the incidence of AL was just 1.7% vs. 6.5% in the pmCG ( p = 0.044). The incidence of surgical site infections (1.7% vs. 3.1%; p = 0.536), reoperations (0.8% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.136) and postoperative mortality (0% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.200) was lower in pmMG. Additionally, the postoperative outcomes were better: the times to first flatus, to first stool and to oral feeding were shorter (1 vs. 2, 2 vs. 3 and 2 vs. 3 days, respectively; p < 0.001). The postoperative recovery was faster, with a shorter time to discharge (5 vs. 6 days; p < 0.001). The MIRACLe protocol was confirmed to be safe and significantly able to reduce anastomotic leaks in patients receiving elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer.

Background: A preliminary analysis from the COVID-Advanced Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgical Treatment (AGICT) study showed that the rate of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for elective and urgent procedures did not decrease during the pandemic year. In this article, we aimed to perform a subgroup analysis using data from the COVID-AGICT study to evaluate the trend of MIS during the COVID-19 pandemic period in Italy. Methods: This study was conducted collecting data of MIS patients from the COVID-AGICT database. The primary endpoint was to demonstrate whether the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic scenario reduced MIS for elective treatment of gastrointestinal cancer (GIC) in Italy in 2020. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate the impact of the pandemic period on perioperative outcomes in the MIS group. Results: In the pandemic year, 62% of patients underwent surgery with a minimally invasive approach, compared to 63% in 2019 (P = .23). In 2020, the proportion of patients undergoing elective MIS decreased compared to the previous year (80% versus 82%, P = .04), and the rate of urgent MIS did not differ between the 2 years (31% and 33% in 2019 and 2020 - P = .66). Colorectal cancer was less likely to be treated with MIS approach during 2020 (78% versus 75%, P < .001). Conversely, the rate of MIS pancreatic resection was higher in 2020 (28% versus 22%, P < .002). Conversion to an open approach was lower in 2020 (7.2% versus 9.2% - P = .01). Major postoperative complications were similar in both years (11% versus 11%, P = .9). Conclusion: In conclusion, although MIS for elective treatment of GIC in Italy was reduced during the COVID-19 pandemic period, our study revealed that the overall proportion of MIS (elective and urgent) and postoperative outcomes were comparable to the prepandemic period. ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT04686747).

Aim: Intraperitoneal drains are often placed during emergency colorectal surgery. However, there is a lack of evidence supporting their use. This study aimed to describe the efficacy and safety of intraperitoneal drain placement after emergency colorectal surgery. Method: COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery (COMPASS) is a prospective, international, cohort study into which consecutive adult patients undergoing emergency colorectal surgery were enrolled (from 3 February 2020 to 8 March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included rate and time-to-diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections, rate of surgical site infections (SSIs), time to discharge and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien-Dindo III-V). Multivariable logistic and Cox proportional hazards regressions were used to estimate the independent association of the outcomes with drain placement. Results: Some 725 patients (median age 68.0years; 349 [48.1%] women) from 22 countries were included. The drain insertion rate was 53.7% (389 patients). Following multivariable adjustment, drains were not significantly associated with reduced rates (odds ratio [OR] =1.56, 95% CI: 0.48-5.02, p=0.457) or earlier detection (hazard ratio [HR] =1.07, 95% CI: 0.61-1.90, p=0.805) of collections. Drains were not significantly associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR=1.26, 95% CI: 0.67-2.36, p=0.478), delayed hospital discharge (HR=1.11, 95% CI: 0.91-1.36, p=0.303) or increased risk of SSIs (OR=1.61, 95% CI: 0.87-2.99, p=0.128). Conclusion: This is the first study investigating placement of intraperitoneal drains following emergency colorectal surgery. The safety and clinical benefit of drains remain uncertain. Equipoise exists for randomized trials to define the safety and efficacy of drains in emergency colorectal surgery.

Background: Several US risk stratification score systems (RSSs) have been developed to standardize a thyroid nodule risk of malignancy. It is still a matter of debate which RSS is the most reliable. The purpose of this study is to evaluate: (1) the concordance between the American College of Radiology TI-RADS (ACR TI-RADS) and fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), (2) the cancer rate in the ACR TI-RADS categories, (3) the characteristics of nodules evaluated by FNAC even if not formally indicated according to ACR TI-RADS (‘not indicated FNACs”). Methods: From January 2021 to September 2022, patients attending the Endocrinology Unit of the CTO Hospital of Rome for evaluation of thyroid nodules were included. Results: 830 nodules had negative cytology, belonging to TIR2 and TIR1C. One hundred and thirteen nodules were determined to be suspicious for or consistent with malignancy belonging to TIR3B/TIR4/TIR5. Of this last group, 94% were classified as TR4/TR5 nodules. In total, 87/113 underwent surgery. Among these, 73 had histologically proven cancer, 14 turned out to be benign. “Not indicated FNACs” was 623. Among these, 42 cancers were present. Conclusions: This study confirmed the diagnostic power of ACR TI-RADS. In addition, these data suggest revising the ACR TI-RADS indication to FNAC, especially for TR4.

Background Evidence on the efficacy of minimally invasive (MI) segmental resection of splenic flexure cancer (SFC) is not available, mostly due to the rarity of this tumor. This study aimed to determine the survival outcomes of MI and open treatment, and to investigate whether MI is noninferior to open procedure regarding short-term outcomes. Methods This nationwide retrospective cohort study included all consecutive SFC segmental resections performed in 30 referral centers between 2006 and 2016. The primary endpoint assessing efficacy was the overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific mortality (CSM), recurrence rate (RR), short-term clinical outcomes (a composite of Clavien-Dindo > 2 complications and 30-day mortality), and pathological outcomes (a composite of lymph nodes removed ≧12, and proximal and distal free resection margins length ≧ 5 cm). For these composites, a 6% noninferiority margin was chosen based on clinical relevance estimate. Results A total of 606 patients underwent either an open (208, 34.3%) or a MI (398, 65.7%) SFC segmental resection. At univariable analysis, OS and CSM were improved in the MI group (log-rank test p = 0.004 and Gray’s tests p = 0.004, respectively), while recurrences were comparable (Gray’s tests p = 0.434). Cox multivariable analysis did not support that OS and CSM were better in the MI group ( p = 0.109 and p = 0.163, respectively). Successful pathological outcome, observed in 53.2% of open and 58.3% of MI resections, supported noninferiority (difference 5.1%; 1-sided 95%CI − 4.7% to ∞). Successful short-term clinical outcome was documented in 93.3% of Open and 93.0% of MI procedures, and supported noninferiority as well (difference − 0.3%; 1-sided 95%CI − 5.0% to ∞). Conclusions Among patients with SFC, the minimally invasive approach met the criterion for noninferiority for postoperative complications and pathological outcomes, and was found to provide results of OS, CSM, and RR comparable to those of open resection.

INTRODUCTION: Total mesorectal excision (TME) during rectal resection is considered the gold standard for the treatment of rectal cancer. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) was first described in 2010 and has been applied to humans since 2012 to overcome some of the technical difficulties associated with minimally invasive TMEs.EVIDENCE ACQUSITION: A systematic review of the literature was conducted, and it focused on articles published between 2012 and 2022 to analyze the state of the art of surgical techniques and indications, as well as potential technical, oncological, and functional benefits.EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: The indications for TaTME are not yet standardized, and structured training programs are necessary to complete a safe learning curve for this new technique. The procedure, when compared with conventional open or minimally invasive TME, is feasible and safe with similar intraoperative and postoperative complications. On the other hand, some new specific complications of this new approach have been described. The short-term pathological and oncologic results are encouraging, especially in terms of the mesorectal specimen quality, distal resection margin and conversion rate. Also, the functional results seem encouraging when compared with other minimally invasive techniques.CONCLUSIONS: Long-term follow-up and ongoing RCT trials are fundamental to evaluate the possible benefits in terms of local recurrence and survival. This will facilitate the comparison with other minimally invasive rectal resections.

Background: This Italian multicentric retrospective study aimed to investigate the possible changes in outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for gastrointestinal cancers during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method: Our primary endpoint was to determine whether the pandemic scenario increased the rate of patients with colorectal, gastroesophageal, and pancreatic cancers resected at an advanced stage in 2020 compared to 2019. Considering different cancer staging systems, we divided tumors into early stages and advanced stages, using pathological outcomes. Furthermore, to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical outcomes, perioperative data of both 2020 and 2019 were also examined. Results: Overall, a total of 8250 patients, 4370 (53%) and 3880 (47%) were surgically treated during 2019 and 2020 respectively, in 62 Italian surgical Units. In 2020, the rate of patients treated with an advanced pathological stage was not different compared to 2019 (P = 0.25). Nevertheless, the analysis of quarters revealed that in the second half of 2020 the rate of advanced cancer resected, tented to be higher compared with the same months of 2019 (P = 0.05). During the pandemic year 'Charlson Comorbidity Index score of cancer patients (5.38 +/- 2.08 vs 5.28 +/- 2.22, P = 0.036), neoadjuvant treatments (23.9% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.001), rate of urgent diagnosis (24.2% vs 20.3%, P < 0.001), colorectal cancer urgent resection (9.4% vs. 7.37, P < 0.001), and the rate of positive nodes on the total nodes resected per surgery increased significantly (7 vs 9% -2.02 +/- 4.21 vs 2.39 +/- 5.23, P < 0.001). Conclusions: Although the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic did not influence the pathological stage of colorectal, gastro-esophageal, and pancreatic cancers at the time of surgery, our study revealed that the pandemic scenario negatively impacted on several perioperative and post-operative outcomes.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and compliance with the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol in octogenarian patients undergoing colorectal surgery in 12 Italian high-volume centers. A retrospective analysis was conducted in a consecutive series of patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery between 2016 and 2018. Patients were grouped by age (≥ 80 years vs < 80 years), propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed, and the groups were compared regarding clinical outcomes and the mean number of ERAS items applied. Out of 1646 patients identified, 310 were octogenarians. PSM identified 2 cohorts of 125 patients for the comparison of postoperative outcomes and ERAS compliance. The 2 groups were homogeneous regarding the clinical variables and mean number of ERAS items applied (11.3 vs 11.9, p-ns); however, the application of intraoperative items was greater in nonelderly patients (p 0.004). The functional recovery was similar between the two groups, as were the rates of postoperative severe complications and 30-day mortality rate. Elderly patients had more overall complications. Furthermore, the mean hospital stay was higher in the elderly group (p 0.027). Multivariable analyses documented that postoperative stay was inversely correlated with the number of ERAS items applied (p < 0.0001), whereas age ≥ 80 years significantly correlated with the overall complication rate (p 0.0419). The ERAS protocol is safe in octogenarian patients, with similar levels of compliance and surgical outcomes. However, octogenarian patients have a higher rate of overall complications and a longer hospital stay than do younger patients.

Background The aim of this study was to investigate how the COVID-19 pandemic influenced ERAS program application in colorectal surgery across hospitals in the Lazio region (central district in Italy) participating in the "Lazio Network" project. Methods A multi-institutional database was constructed. All patients included in this study underwent elective colorectal surgery for both malignant and benign disease between January 2019 and December 2020. Emergency procedures were excluded. The population was divided into 2 groups: a pre-COVID-19 group (PG) of patients operated on between February and December 2019 and a COVID-19 group (CG) of patients operated on between February and December 2020, during the first 2 waves of the pandemic in Italy. Results The groups included 622 patients in the PG and 615 in the CG treated in 8 hospitals of the network. The mean number of items applied was higher in the PG (65.6% vs. 56.6%, p < 0.001) in terms of preoperative items (64.2% vs. 50.7%, p < 0.001), intraoperative items (65.0% vs. 53.3%, p < 0.001), and postoperative items (68.8% vs. 63.2%, p < 0.001). Postoperative recovery was faster in the PG, with a shorter time to first flatus, first stool, autonomous mobilization and discharge (6.82 days vs. 7.43 days, p = 0.021). Postoperative complications, mortality and reoperations were similar among the groups. Conclusions The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the application of ERAS in the centers of the "Lazio Network" study group, with a reduction in adherence to the ERAS protocol in terms of preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative items. In addition, in the CG, the patients had worse postoperative outcomes with respect to recovery and discharge.

Purpose: Nutritional support is a keystone component in perioperative care in patients undergoing oncological surgery with a direct impact on surgical outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate how nutritional support in the surgical setting is managed and applied in Italian hospitals.Methods: A national survey was designed by the Italian Society of Surgical Oncology (SICO) and disseminated in early 2021. The results were analyzed for the entire population and for comparing the following different subgroups: northern vs. southern regions; high-volume vs. low-volume centers; and junior vs. senior surgeons. Results: Out of the 141 responses collected from all Italian regions, 43.2% of the participants worked in a surgical unit where nutritional status evaluations and interventions were not routinely practiced, although the key features (nutritional counseling, oral supplementation, enteral and parenteral nutrition) were available in 77.3% of the hospitals. Among the participating centers, the ERAS protocol was systematically applied in only 29.5% of cases, and in 25.5% of cases, most of the items were followed, although not systematically. Among the surgeons who practiced in compliance with the ERAS pathways, almost half of the participants declared that the protocol was applied only for low-risk patients. No significant differences were documented when comparing Italian regions, high-volume vs. low-volume institutions or junior vs. senior participants.Conclusion: Nutritional support in oncological surgery is frequently neglected in Italian hospitals, regardless of the geographic distribution and volumes of the institutions. A cultural change and an improvement in the availability of nutritional services are needed for widespread implementation.

The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the effects of a novel perioperative treatment for the implementation of the gut microbiota, to prevent anastomotic fistula and leakage (AL) in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer. A series of 60 patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery at S. Eugenio Hospital (Rome—Italy) between December 1, 2020 and November 30, 2021 and received a novel perioperative preparation following the MIRACLe (Microbiota Implementation to Reduce Anastomotic Colorectal Leaks) protocol (oral antibiotics, mechanical bowel preparation and perioperative probiotics), was compared to a group of 500 patients (control group) operated on between March 2015 and November 30, 2020, who received a standard ERAS protocol. In the MIRACLe Group only 1 anastomotic leak was registered. In this group the incidence of AL was just 1.7% vs. 6.4% in the control group (p = 0.238) and the incidence of surgical site infections (1.7% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.686), reoperations (1.7% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.547) and postoperative mortality (0% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.504) were lower. The postoperative outcomes were also better: the times to first flatus, to first stool and to oral feeding were shorter (1 vs. 2, 2 vs. 3 and 2 vs. 3 days, respectively; p < 0.001). Additionally, the postoperative recovery was faster, with a shorter time to discharge (4 vs. 6 days; p < 0.001). In this pilot study, the MIRACLe protocol appeared to be safe and considerably reduced anastomotic leaks in elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery for cancer, even if not statistically significant, due to the small number of cases.

To compare the short-term outcomes in patients who underwent laparoscopic right colectomy with a traditional minimally invasive approach versus patients who underwent a laparoscopic colectomy with an enhanced perioperative pathway. A retrospective analysis was conducted on a consecutive series of patients who underwent elective laparoscopic right colectomy for neoplastic disease between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2020. The patients were divided into two groups: the first cohort (FC), who underwent a traditional laparoscopic colectomy, mainly with extracorporeal anastomosis, between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015 and the second cohort (SC), who underwent a laparoscopic colectomy with an enhanced intraoperative (intracorporeal anastomosis) and perioperative pathway (ERAS protocol) between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2020. There were a total of 361 patients, including 177 in the FC and 184 in the SC. In the SC a higher number of intracorporeal anastomoses was performed (91.8% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001), drains were placed in 42 patients only (22.8% vs. 100% in the FC) and nasogastric tubes were placed in 21 patients only (11.4% vs. 100% in the FC). In the initial period of the SC. the procedures required a slightly longer operative time (median 105 vs. 95 min; p = 0.002), but postoperative surgical complications were lower (12% vs. 17.4%, p = 0.179). Postoperative recovery was faster in SC along with time to discharge (4 vs. 7 days; p < 0.001). Intraoperative anastomosis and enhanced pathways in right laparoscopic colectomy seem to guarantee better results with lower surgical complications and faster postoperative recovery.

Abstract Background Many surgeons routinely place intraperitoneal drains after elective colorectal surgery. However, enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines recommend against their routine use owing to a lack of clear clinical benefit. This study aimed to describe international variation in intraperitoneal drain placement and the safety of this practice. Methods COMPASS (COMPlicAted intra-abdominal collectionS after colorectal Surgery) was a prospective, international, cohort study which enrolled consecutive adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery (February to March 2020). The primary outcome was the rate of intraperitoneal drain placement. Secondary outcomes included: rate and time to diagnosis of postoperative intraperitoneal collections; rate of surgical site infections (SSIs); time to discharge; and 30-day major postoperative complications (Clavien–Dindo grade at least III). After propensity score matching, multivariable logistic regression and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to estimate the independent association of the secondary outcomes with drain placement. Results Overall, 1805 patients from 22 countries were included (798 women, 44.2 per cent; median age 67.0 years). The drain insertion rate was 51.9 per cent (937 patients). After matching, drains were not associated with reduced rates (odds ratio (OR) 1.33, 95 per cent c.i. 0.79 to 2.23; P = 0.287) or earlier detection (hazard ratio (HR) 0.87, 0.33 to 2.31; P = 0.780) of collections. Although not associated with worse major postoperative complications (OR 1.09, 0.68 to 1.75; P = 0.709), drains were associated with delayed hospital discharge (HR 0.58, 0.52 to 0.66; P < 0.001) and an increased risk of SSIs (OR 2.47, 1.50 to 4.05; P < 0.001). Conclusion Intraperitoneal drain placement after elective colorectal surgery is not associated with earlier detection of postoperative collections, but prolongs hospital stay and increases SSI risk.