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).

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.

Background:After the results reported by the "Chemoradiotherapy for esophageal Cancer Followed by Surgery Study" (CROSS) trial, neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy became the standard treatment for locally advanced cancers of esophagus and gastroesophageal junction (GEJ). Excellent results were reported for squamocellular carcinomas (SCCs). Since the advent of the CROSS regimen, the results of surgery for esophageal adenocarcinomas (EAC) have cast some doubts about its efficacy on overall survival (OS) even in the presence of local response. This study evaluated the relation between pathological (yp) stage after CROSS regimen followed by surgery for adenocarcinoma of cardia and overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Sites of relapse after surgery were also analyzed. Methods: Patients submitted to the CROSS regimen for locally advanced EAC of the cardia followed by transthoracic esophagectomy were analyzed. Actuarial OS and DFS were analyzed and stratified according to yp stage. The site of relapse, distal and local, was also analyzed. Results: The study included 132 patients. The 50-month OS and DFS were 45% and 6.7%, respectively. No differences emerged analyzing OS according to yp stage. Time to relapse was significantly longer for yp Stage I and II, and for yp N0, compared with yp N+. Recurrence occurred in 48 cases (36.3%) with a 9 months median time to relapse. Local and distal relapse were 10 (7.5%) and 38 (28.7%) cases, respectively (p ≦ 0.001). Conclusions: Pathological stage after CROSS regimen does not relate to OS and DFS. Time to recurrence is significantly longer for yp Stages I and II and ypN0. Chemoradiotherapy in a neoadjuvant setting may influence the site of relapse, significantly reducing local recurrences.

Transabdominal preperitoneal (TAPP) repair is widely used to treat bilateral or recurrent inguinal hernias. Recently a self-gripping mesh has been introduced into clinical practice. This mesh does not need staple fixation and thus might reduce the incidence of chronic pain. This prospective study aimed to compare two groups of patients with bilateral (BIH) or monolateral (MIH) primary or recurrent inguinal hernia treated with TAPP using either a self-gripping polyester and polylactic acid mesh (SGM) or a polypropylene and poliglecaprone mesh fixed with four titanium staples [standard technique (ST)].

AIM:Laparoscopic Heller myotomy combined with anterior (Dor) fundoplication is the most widely-used surgical procedure for treating esophageal achalasia in EuropeMATERIAL OF STUDY:From November 1992 through May 2010 we performed laparoscopic Heller-Dor on 173 patientsRESULTS:Conversion to laparotomy was required in three cases (1.7%) at the beginning of the experience (for mucosal) perforation which was the most frequent intraoperative complication, managed laparoscopically with the increasing experience. Five (2.9%) cases had minor postoperative complications. Clinical results were satisfactory in 99.4% of cases. One patient (0.6%) had severe persistent dysphagia. Mean esophageal diameter decreased from 50 mm ± 12 (range 20- 90) to 25 mm ± 7 (range 15-80). Lower esophageal sphincter pressure decreased from 32 mmHg (median, range 10- 93) pre-operatively to 11 mmHg (median, range 5-21) at one year follow up and residual pressure from 12 mmHg (median, range 3-30) to 4 mmHg (median, range 1-8). Impedance and pH monitoring showed normal levels in 39/47 (83%) patients who agreed to testing.CONCLUSION:The good outcomes of this experience, in part due to careful adherence to technical aspects of the operation, confirm that the laparoscopic Heller-Dor is the gold standard surgical treatment for esophageal achalasia.

BACKGROUND: The real incidence of epiphrenic diverticulum is unknown,. and only 15% to 20% of cases are symptomatic.METHODS: From January 1994 to May 2009, 20 patients were treated laparoscopically for this condition.RESULTS: The most common operation performed was transhiatal diverticulectomy with myotomy and partial fundoplication. No case was converted to open surgery. Esophageal leak occurred in 1 patient (5%). The postoperative courses were uneventful in the remaining 19 patients. After a median follow-up period of 52 months (range, 1-141 months), 1 patient had died of squamous cell carcinoma, 1 had mild solid-food dysphagia, 1 had chest pain, and 1 had heartburn. Manometry was performed postoperatively in 7 patients; all had normal lower esophageal sphincter pressure. In 5 patients who underwent 24-hour postoperative pH monitoring, pathologic reflux was absent.CONCLUSIONS: In patients with symptomatic epiphrenic diverticulum, laparoscopic surgery is feasible, providing good access to the distal esophagus and inferior mediastinum. Long-term outcomes are satisfactory. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy was developed with the aim of reducing the invasiveness of traditional laparoscopy, diminishing postoperative pain and morbidity. The aim of this prospective study was to assess the feasibility and the efficacy of this new approach. Between April and December 2009, a total of 21 patients underwent single-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy for symptomatic gallbladder stone disease. Single surgeon, elective patient, no preoperative diagnosis of common bile duct stone and no previous upper abdominal surgery were the selection criteria chosen for the study. Attempt to reproduce the standard technique (routine intraoperative cholangiography) was considered. Twenty patients (95.2%) successfully completed single-port surgery, and the median operative time was 65 min (range 40-122). Conversion to standard laparoscopic cholecystectomy was required for one patient (4.8%) for a difficult haemostasis. Intraoperative cholangiography was performed for 14 patients (66.7%). Seven patients (33.3%) were discharged on the same day of the operation; median hospital stay was 1 day (range 1-4). No postoperative complications were observed; one patient was reoperated on the same day of surgery because of unexplained abdominal pain and leucocytosis, but relaparoscopy demonstrated no fluid collection. On the 1st postoperative day, median VAS was 3. Most patients declared to be satisfied with the result of the operation and the resulting scar. Transumbilical single-port access cholecystectomy is feasible using standard laparoscopic instruments. It may reduce morbidity, postoperative pain and may offer cosmetic advantages compared with standard laparoscopic approach. However, presently the procedure may be performed only by surgeons with wide experience with this operation through standard laparoscopic access.