Explore the vast range of titles available.

ᅟ Obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer represent challenging matters in terms of diagnosis, life-saving strategies, obstruction resolution and oncologic challenge. The aims of the current paper are to update the previous WSES guidelines for the management of large bowel perforation and obstructive left colon carcinoma (OLCC) and to develop new guidelines on obstructive right colon carcinoma (ORCC). Methods The literature was extensively queried for focused publication until December 2017. Precise analysis and grading of the literature has been performed by a working group formed by a pool of experts: the statements and literature review were presented, discussed and voted at the Consensus Conference of the 4th Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) held in Campinas in May 2017. Results CT scan is the best imaging technique to evaluate large bowel obstruction and perforation. For OLCC, self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS), when available, offers interesting advantages as compared to emergency surgery; however, the positioning of SEMS for surgically treatable causes carries some long-term oncologic disadvantages, which are still under analysis. In the context of emergency surgery, resection and primary anastomosis (RPA) is preferable to Hartmann’s procedure, whenever the characteristics of the patient and the surgeon are permissive. Right-sided loop colostomy is preferable in rectal cancer, when preoperative therapies are predicted. With regards to the treatment of ORCC, right colectomy represents the procedure of choice; alternatives, such as internal bypass and loop ileostomy, are of limited value. Clinical scenarios in the case of perforation might be dramatic, especially in case of free faecal peritonitis. The importance of an appropriate balance between life-saving surgical procedures and respect of oncologic caveats must be stressed. In selected cases, a damage control approach may be required. Medical treatments including appropriate fluid resuscitation, early antibiotic treatment and management of co-existing medical conditions according to international guidelines must be delivered to all patients at presentation. Conclusions The current guidelines offer an extensive overview of available evidence and a qualitative consensus regarding management of large bowel obstruction and perforation due to colorectal cancer.

In this multicenter, randomized trial comparing primary peritoneal drainage with laparotomy for the management of perforated necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants with birth weights less than 1500 g, there were no significant differences between groups in mortality at 90 days, dependence on total parenteral nutrition at 90 days, or length of the hospital stay in surviving infants. These data do not support an advantage of either primary peritoneal drainage or laparotomy over the alternative approach among preterm infants with perforated necrotizing enterocolitis. This trial compared primary peritoneal drainage with laparotomy for the management of perforated necrotizing enterocolitis in preterm infants. There were no significant differences between groups in mortality at 90 days, dependence on total parenteral nutrition at 90 days, or length of the hospital stay in surviving infants. Necrotizing enterocolitis is a severe inflammatory disorder of the intestine occurring in premature infants. It is a major cause of death and morbidity in neonates. 1 In contrast to the improvements during the past 30 years in the outcomes of many conditions affecting premature infants, the mortality rate of 30 to 50 percent for babies with intestinal perforation due to necrotizing enterocolitis remains essentially unchanged. 2 The standard approach to patients with perforated intestine, necrotic intestine, or both is surgical resection of the involved bowel with the creation of intestinal stomas. In a critically ill premature infant, this entails substantial risks. Primary . . .

Case series suggest that laparoscopic peritoneal lavage might be a promising alternative to sigmoidectomy in patients with perforated diverticulitis. We aimed to assess the superiority of laparoscopic lavage compared with sigmoidectomy in patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis, with respect to overall long-term morbidity and mortality. We did a multicentre, parallel-group, randomised, open-label trial in 34 teaching hospitals and eight academic hospitals in Belgium, Italy, and the Netherlands (the Ladies trial). The Ladies trial is split into two groups: the LOLA group comparing laparoscopic lavage with sigmoidectomy and the DIVA group comparing Hartmann's procedure with sigmoidectomy plus primary anastomosis. The DIVA section of this trial is still underway but here we report the results of the LOLA section. Patients with purulent perforated diverticulitis were enrolled for LOLA, excluding patients with faecal peritonitis, aged older than 85 years, with high-dose steroid use (≥20 mg daily), and haemodynamic instability. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1:1; stratified by age [<60 years vs ≥60 years]) using secure online computer randomisation to laparoscopic lavage, Hartmann's procedure, or primary anastomosis in a parallel design after diagnostic laparoscopy. Patients were analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat principle and were followed up after the index operation at least once in the outpatient setting and after sigmoidoscopy and stoma reversal, according to local protocols. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major morbidity and mortality within 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01317485. Between July 1, 2010, and Feb 22, 2013, 90 patients were randomly assigned in the LOLA section of the Ladies trial when the study was terminated by the data and safety monitoring board because of an increased event rate in the lavage group. Two patients were excluded for protocol violations. The primary endpoint occurred in 30 (67%) of 45 patients in the lavage group and 25 (60%) of 42 patients in the sigmoidectomy group (odds ratio 1·28, 95% CI 0·54–3·03, p=0·58). By 12 months, four patients had died after lavage and six patients had died after sigmoidectomy (p=0·43). Laparoscopic lavage is not superior to sigmoidectomy for the treatment of purulent perforated diverticulitis. Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development.

ObjectivesPerforation is the most serious complication associated with endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR). We propose a new classification for the appearance and integrity of the muscularis propria (MP) after EMR including various extents of deep mural injury (DMI). Risk factors for these injuries were analysed.DesignEndoscopic images and histological specimens of consecutive patients undergoing EMR of colonic laterally spreading lesions ≥20 mm at a large Australian tertiary referral endoscopy unit were retrospectively analysed using our new DMI classification system. DMI was graded according to MP injury (I/II intact MP without/with fibrosis, III target sign, IV/V obvious transmural perforation without/with contamination). Histological specimens were examined for included MP and patient outcomes were recorded. All type III–V DMI signs were clipped if possible, types I and II DMI were clipped at the endoscopists’ discretion.ResultsEMR was performed in 911 lesions (mean size 37 mm) in 802 patients (male sex 51.4%, mean age 67 years). DMI signs were identified in 83 patients (10.3%). Type III–V DMI was identified in 24 patients (3.0%); clipping was successfully performed in all patients. A clinically significant perforation occurred in two patients (0.2%). Only one of the 59 type I/II cases experienced a delayed perforation. 85.5% of patients with DMI were discharged on the same day, all without sequelae. On multivariable analysis, type III–V DMI was associated with transverse colon location (OR 3.55, p=0.028), en bloc resection (OR 3.84, p=0.005) and high-grade dysplasia or submucosal invasive cancer (OR 2.97, p 0.014).ConclusionsIn this retrospective analysis, use of the new classification and management with clips appeared to be a safe approach. Advanced DMI types (III–V) occurred in 3.0% of patients and were associated with identifiable risk factors. Further prospective clinical studies should use this new classification.Trial registration numberNCT01368289; results.

BackgroundThis study aimed to compare laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy as treatment for perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis during a 36 month follow-up of the LOLA trial.MethodsWithin the LOLA arm of the international, multicentre LADIES trial, patients with perforated diverticulitis with purulent peritonitis were randomised between laparoscopic lavage and sigmoidectomy. Outcomes were collected up to 36 months. The primary outcome of the present study was cumulative morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included reoperations (including stoma reversals), stoma rates, and sigmoidectomy rates in the lavage group.ResultsLong-term follow-up was recorded in 77 of the 88 originally included patients, 39 were randomised to sigmoidectomy (51%) and 38 to laparoscopic lavage (49%). After 36 months, overall cumulative morbidity (sigmoidectomy 28/39 (72%) versus lavage 32/38 (84%), p = 0·272) and mortality (sigmoidectomy 7/39 (18%) versus lavage 6/38 (16%), p = 1·000) did not differ. The number of patients who underwent a reoperation was significantly lower for lavage compared to sigmoidectomy (sigmoidectomy 27/39 (69%) versus lavage 17/38 (45%), p = 0·039). After 36 months, patients alive with stoma in situ was lower in the lavage group (proportion calculated from the Kaplan–Meier life table, sigmoidectomy 17% vs lavage 11%, log-rank p = 0·0268). Eventually, 17 of 38 (45%) patients allocated to lavage underwent sigmoidectomy.ConclusionLong-term outcomes showed that laparoscopic lavage was associated with less patients who underwent reoperations and lower stoma rates in patients alive after 36 months compared to sigmoidectomy. No differences were found in terms of cumulative morbidity or mortality. Patient selection should be improved to reduce risk for short-term complications after which lavage could still be a valuable treatment option.

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) is a well-known procedure with both diagnostic and therapeutic utilities in managing pancreaticobiliary conditions. With the advancements of endoscopic techniques, ERCP has become a relatively safe and effective procedure. However, as ERCP is increasingly being utilized for different advanced techniques, newer complications have been noticed. Post-ERCP complications are known, and mostly include pancreatitis, infection, hemorrhage, and perforation. The risks of these complications vary depending on several factors, such as patient selection, endoscopist’s skills, and the difficulties involved during the procedure. This review discusses post-ERCP complications and management strategies with new and evolving concepts.

Objective To delineate gestational age (GA)-dependent pathophysiology of necrotizing enterocolitis-associated intestinal perforation (NEC-IP) and establish precision management protocols. Methods A single-center retrospective cohort study (2013–2023) included 66 preterm (< 37 weeks) and 38 term (≥ 37 weeks) neonates with NEC-associated perforations. Outcomes included anatomical distribution, microbiological profiles, management disparities, and prognoses. Results Preterm infants exhibited significantly higher rates of twin gestation (43.9% vs 7.9%, p  = 0.003), antenatal steroid exposure (43.9% vs 2.6%, p  < 0.001), and preoperative fasting rate (33.3% vs 7.9%, p  = 0.009) compared to term infants. Preterm infants demonstrated Gram-positive bacteremia (83.3%) with Gram-negative peritoneal predominance (83.9%), alongside significantly lower leukocyte counts (Stage 2:12.6 vs 14.9 × 10⁹/L, Stage 3: 9.1 vs 11.1 × 10⁹/L, both p  < 0.05), platelet levels (all stage), and hemoglobin levels (Stage 1:125.1 vs 141.6 × 10 12 /L, p  = 0.004). Term infants showed Gram-positive peritoneal dominance (76.2%) with classic peritonitis signs (hematochezia 68.4%, abdominal tenderness 55.3%). Lleal perforations predominated in preterms (69.7% vs 21.1%, p  < 0.001), whereas colonic involvement was prevalent in terms (63.1%). Prolonged parenteral nutrition in preterms (27.0 vs 20.0 days, p  = 0.009) correlating with prolonged hospitalization (38.4 ± 9.7 vs 23.5 ± 8.1 days; p  < 0.001), achieved higher enteral tolerance (151.7 vs 134.2 ml/kg/d, p  = 0.009). There was no case dead in initial admission. Rehospitalization and mortality rates in readmission were comparable (term 73.7 vs preterm 60.6%, p = 0.177;1% vs 2%; p  = 0.653). Although weight at discharge in term group was higher compared to preterm infants (2.5 ± 0.4 vs 3.5 ± 0.6 kg; p  < 0.001), while weight velocity was similar between two groups (18.3 ± 7.5 vs 16.6 ± 9.6 g.kg⁻ 1 ·d⁻ 1 ; p  = 0.312). Conclusion GA-specific NEC-IP mechanisms mandate: (1) preterm-focused ileal exploration & Gram-negative coverage, (2) term-focused retroperitoneal debridement & Gram-positive control, and (3) GA-stratified diagnostic framework integrating clinical signs and imaging. This precision approach reduces missed perforations and surgical delays.

ObjectiveTo investigate the risk of developing lower intestinal perforations (LIPs) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treated with tocilizumab (TCZ).MethodsIn 13 310 patients with RA observed in the German biologics register Rheumatoid Arthritis: Observation of Biologic Therapy, 141 serious gastrointestinal events possibly associated with perforations were reported until 31 October 2015. All events were validated independently by two physicians, blinded for treatment exposure.Results37 LIPs (32 in the colon/sigma) were observed in 53 972 patient years (PYs). Only two patients had a history of diverticulitis (one in TCZ). Age, current/cumulative glucocorticoids and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs were significantly associated with the risk of LIP. The crude incidence rate of LIP was significantly increased in TCZ (2.7/1000 PYs) as compared with all other treatments (0.2−0.6/1000 PYs). The adjusted HR (ref: conventional synthetic (cs) disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs)) in TCZ was 4.48 (95% CI 2.0 to 10.0), in tumour necrosis factor-α inhibitor (TNFi) 1.04 (0.5 to 2.3) and in other biologic DMARDs 0.33 (0.1 to 1.4). 4/11 patients treated with TCZ presented without typical symptoms of LIP (acute abdomen, severe pain). Only one patient had highly elevated C reactive protein (CRP). One quarter of patients died within 30 days after LIP (9/37), 5/11 under TCZ, 2/13 under TNFi and 2/11 under csDMARD treatment.ConclusionsThe incidence rates of LIP under TCZ found in this real world study are in line with those seen in randomised controlled trials of TCZ and higher than in all other DMARD treatments. To ensure safe use of TCZ in daily practice, physicians and patients should be aware that, under TCZ, LIP may occur with mild symptoms only and without CRP elevation.

Background Potential advantages of laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis are still under consideration. This study is designed to determine if emergent laparoscopic sigmoidectomy for perforated diverticulitis is associated with outcomes comparable to the traditional open approach. Methods The American College of Surgeons-National-Surgical-Quality-Improvement-Program (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried for laparoscopic and open emergent sigmoidectomy cases for perforated diverticulitis from 2012 through 2017. Using propensity score weights, 30-day outcomes between laparoscopic and open approaches were compared in two ways: one with converted cases as a separate group and another with converted cases combined with the laparoscopic-completed group (intention-to-treat). Results A total of 3756 cases met inclusion criteria—282 laparoscopic-completed, 175 laparoscopic-converted-to-open, and 3299 open. The laparoscopic-completed approach had significantly better outcomes than open and laparoscopic-converted cases. When combining laparoscopic-completed and laparoscopic-converted cases (intention-to-treat), the laparoscopic approach still had significantly fewer complications per patient, less unplanned intubation ( p  = 0.01), and acute renal failure ( p  = 0.005) than the open group. Laparoscopic groups had longer operating times and shorter hospital length of stay than the open group. Subgroup analysis comparing laparoscopic and open Hartmann’s procedure and primary anastomosis with and without diverting stoma also showed favorable outcomes for the laparoscopic group. Conclusions Laparoscopic emergent sigmoid resection for perforated diverticulitis is associated with favorable outcomes compared to the open approach. Hartmann’s procedure is still common and conversion rate is high. Training efforts that increase adoption of minimally invasive surgery and decrease conversion rates are justified. Randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open approaches may allow further critical assessment of these findings.

Background Perforated diverticulitis is a condition associated with substantial morbidity. Recently published reports suggest that laparoscopic lavage has fewer complications and shorter hospital stay. So far no randomised study has published any results. Methods DILALA is a Scandinavian, randomised trial, comparing laparoscopic lavage (LL) to the traditional Hartmann's Procedure (HP). Primary endpoint is the number of re-operations within 12 months. Secondary endpoints consist of mortality, quality of life (QoL), re-admission, health economy assessment and permanent stoma. Patients are included when surgery is required. A laparoscopy is performed and if Hinchey grade III is diagnosed the patient is included and randomised 1:1, to either LL or HP. Patients undergoing LL receive > 3L of saline intraperitoneally, placement of pelvic drain and continued antibiotics. Follow-up is scheduled 6-12 weeks, 6 months and 12 months. A QoL-form is filled out on discharge, 6- and 12 months. Inclusion is set to 80 patients (40+40). Discussion HP is associated with a high rate of complication. Not only does the primary operation entail complications, but also subsequent surgery is associated with a high morbidity. Thus the combined risk of treatment for the patient is high. The aim of the DILALA trial is to evaluate if laparoscopic lavage is a safe, minimally invasive method for patients with perforated diverticulitis Hinchey grade III, resulting in fewer re-operations, decreased morbidity, mortality, costs and increased quality of life. Trial registration British registry (ISRCTN) for clinical trials ISRCTN82208287 http://www.controlled-trials.com/ISRCTN82208287