Epidemiology, oncologic results and risk stratifcation model for metachronous peritoneal metastases after surgery for pT4 colon cancers: results from an observational retrospective multicentre long¿term follow-up study

Purpose Metachronous peritoneal metastases (MPM) following a curative surgery procedure for pT4 colon cancer is a chal lenging condition. Current epidemiological studies on this topic are scarce. Methods A retrospective multicentre trial was designed. All consecutive patients who underwent operations to treat pT4 cancers between 2015 and 2017 were reviewed. Demographic, clinical, operative, pathological and oncological follow-up variables were included. MPM were described as any oncological disease at the peritoneum, clearly diferent from a local recurrence. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression models were constructed. A risk stratifcation model was created on a cumulative factor basis. According to the calculated hazard ratio (HR), a scoring system was designed (HR<3, 1 point; HR>3, 2 points) and a scale from 0 to 6 was calculated for peritoneal disease-free rate (PDF-R). A risk stratifcation model was also created on the basis of these calculations. Results Fifty diferent hospitals were involved, which included a total of 1356 patients. Incidence of MPM was 13.6% at 50 months median follow-up. The strongest independent risk factors for MPM were positive pN stage [HR 3.72 (95% CI 2.56¿5.41; p<0.01) for stage III disease], tumour perforation [HR 1.91 (95% CI 1.26¿2.87; p<0.01)], mucinous or signet ring cell histology [HR 1.68 (95% CI 1.1¿2.58; p=0.02)], poorly diferentiated tumours [HR 1.54 (95% CI 1.1¿2.2; p=0.02)] and emergency surgery [HR 1.42 (95% CI 1.01¿2.01; p=0.049)]. In the absence of additional risk factors, pT4 tumours showed 98% and 96% PDF-R in 1-year and 5-year periods based on Kaplan¿Meier curves. Conclusions Cumulative MPM incidence was 13.6% at 5-year follow-up. The sole presence of a pT4 tumour resulted in high rates of PDF-R at 1-year and 5-year follow-up (98% and 96% respectively). Five additional risk factors diferent from pT4 status itself were identifed as possible MPM indicators during follow-up. Keywords Colon cancer · Metachronous peritoneal metastases · Second look · HIPEC · Risk stratifcatio

Towards a modular language curriculum for using tasks

Task-based language teaching (TBLT) and task-supported language teaching (TSLT) are often seen as incompatible as they draw on different theories of language learning and language teaching. The position adopted in this article, however, is that both approaches are needed especially in instructional contexts where ‘pure’ task-based teaching may be problematic for various reasons. The article makes a case for a modular curriculum consisting of separate (i.e. non-integrated) task-based and structure-based components. Different curriculum models are considered in the light of what is known about how a second language is learned. The model that is proposed assumes the importance of developing fluency first. It consists of a primary task-based module implemented with focus-on-form (Long, 1991) and, once a basic fluency has been achieved, supported by a secondary structural module to provide for explicit accuracy-oriented work to counteract learned selective attention (N. Ellis, 2006): one of the main sources of persistent error. The article also addresses the content and grading of the task-based and structural modules. It considers the factors that need to be considered in the vertical and horizontal grading of tasks but also points out that, for the time being, syllabus designers will have to draw on their experience and intuition as much as on research to make decisions about how to sequence tasks. An argument is presented for treating the structural component as a checklist rather than as a syllabus so as to allow teachers to address selectively those features that are found to be problematic for their students when they perform tasks

Multisocietal European consensus on the terminology, diagnosis, and management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases: an E-AHPBA consensus in partnership with ESSO, ESCP, ESGAR, and CIRSE

Background: Contemporary management of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases is complex. The aim of this project was to provide a practical framework for care of patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases, with a focus on terminology, diagnosis, and management. Methods: This project was a multiorganizational, multidisciplinary consensus. The consensus group produced statements which focused on terminology, diagnosis, and management. Statements were refined during an online Delphi process, and those with 70 per cent agreement or above were reviewed at a final meeting. Iterations of the report were shared by electronic mail to arrive at a final agreed document comprising 12 key statements. Results: Synchronous liver metastases are those detected at the time of presentation of the primary tumour. The term 'early metachronous metastases' applies to those absent at presentation but detected within 12 months of diagnosis of the primary tumour, the term 'late metachronous metastases' applies to those detected after 12 months. 'Disappearing metastases' applies to lesions that are no longer detectable on MRI after systemic chemotherapy. Guidance was provided on the recommended composition of tumour boards, and clinical assessment in emergency and elective settings. The consensus focused on treatment pathways, including systemic chemotherapy, synchronous surgery, and the staged approach with either colorectal or liver-directed surgery as first step. Management of pulmonary metastases and the role of minimally invasive surgery was discussed. Conclusion: The recommendations of this contemporary consensus provide information of practical value to clinicians managing patients with synchronous colorectal cancer and liver metastases

Outcomes of intended temporary stomas in Crohn's disease (INTESTINE study): International, multicentre, retrospective study

Background Patients with ileocolic Crohn's disease often require surgery that can result in temporary stoma formation. Stomas are associated with a morbidity and can negatively impact quality of life. This study aimed to investigate the short-term (6-month) and mid-term (18-month) outcomes of intended temporary stomas in patients with Crohn's disease. Methods A trainee-led, international multicentre, retrospective study was conducted on all patients who underwent surgery for Crohn's disease in collaborating centres over 4 years (2017-2020). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with Crohn's disease who underwent stoma reversal surgery by 6- and 18-month postoperative follow-up. Secondary outcomes included: the time interval between formation and reversal of stoma and predictors for non-reversal and stoma-related morbidity (postoperative complications, related readmissions and complications due to stoma reversal surgery). Results A total of 401 patients underwent stoma formation for Crohn's disease over the 4 years across the 44 collaborating centres. The temporary stomas had been reversed in 30.2% of patients at the 6-month and 56.9% at the 18-month follow-up. Reasons for non-reversal included ongoing medical treatment for Crohn's disease (respectively 6-month and 18-month: 37.6%, 39.3%), patient unfit for surgery (respectively 6-month and 18-month: 14.5%, 16.8%), patient preference (respectively 6-month and 18-month: 12.1%, 20.2%) and due to waiting lists (respectively 6-month and 18-month: 12.1%, 8.1%). Overall, 63.3% of patients had a temporary stoma reversed with a median time interval of 6 months. The stoma-related overall morbidity rate was 29.4%. Conclusions A large proportion of temporary stomas for Crohn's disease were not reversed at 6 and 18 months following initial surgery. Patients are exposed to the risk of non-reversal and risk of developing stoma complications for significantly longer intervals of time and, in some cases, indefinitely

Management of inflammatory bowel disease in the emergency setting: the MIBODI international survey and evidence-based practices

Aim: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the WSES-AAST guidelines in clinical practice and to investigate the knowledge, attitudes, and practices of emergency surgeons in managing the complications of ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD). Methods: The MIBODI survey is a cross-sectional study among WSES members designed as an international web-based survey, according to the Checklist for Reporting Results of Internet E-Surveys, to collect data on emergency surgeons’ knowledge, attitudes, and practices concerning the management of patients presenting with acute complications of CD and UC. The questionnaire was composed of 30 questions divided into five sections: (1) demographic data, (2) primary evaluation, (3) non-operative management, (4) operative management, and (5) perianal sepsis management. Results: Two hundred and forty-two surgeons from 48 countries agreed to participate in the survey. The response rate was 24.2% (242/1000 members on WSES mail list). Emergency surgeons showed high adherence to recommendations for 6 of the 21 assessed items, with a “correct” response rate greater than or equal to 60%, according to WSES-AAST recommendations. Nine critical issues were highlighted, with correct answers at a rate of less than 50%. Conclusions: Inflammatory bowel disease is a complex disease that requires a multidisciplinary approach with close collaboration between gastroenterologists and surgeons. Emergency surgeons play a crucial role in managing complications related to IBD. One year after publication, the MIBODI study showed significant global implementation of the WSES-AAST guidelines in clinical practice, offering an imperative tool in the improved management of IBD in emergency and urgent settings

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative sars-cov-2 infection: An international cohort study

Background The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (740%) had emergency surgery and 280 (248%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (261%) patients. 30-day mortality was 238% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (512%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 380% (219 of 577), accounting for 817% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 175 [95% CI 128-240], p&lt;00001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (230 [165-322], p&lt;00001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3-5 versus grades 1-2 (235 [157-353], p&lt;00001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (155 [101-239], p=0046), emergency versus elective surgery (167 [106-263], p=0026), and major versus minor surgery (152 [101-231], p=0047). Interpretation Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research

Time for a paradigm shift in shared decision-making in trauma and emergency surgery? Results from an international survey

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) between clinicians and patients is one of the pillars of the modern patient-centric philosophy of care. This study aims to explore SDM in the discipline of trauma and emergency surgery, investigating its interpretation as well as the barriers and facilitators for its implementation among surgeons. Methods: Grounding on the literature on the topics of the understanding, barriers, and facilitators of SDM in trauma and emergency surgery, a survey was created by a multidisciplinary committee and endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES). The survey was sent to all 917 WSES members, advertised through the society’s website, and shared on the society’s Twitter profile. Results: A total of 650 trauma and emergency surgeons from 71 countries in five continents participated in the initiative. Less than half of the surgeons understood SDM, and 30% still saw the value in exclusively engaging multidisciplinary provider teams without involving the patient. Several barriers to effectively partnering with the patient in the decision-making process were identified, such as the lack of time and the need to concentrate on making medical teams work smoothly. Discussion: Our investigation underlines how only a minority of trauma and emergency surgeons understand SDM, and perhaps, the value of SDM is not fully accepted in trauma and emergency situations. The inclusion of SDM practices in clinical guidelines may represent the most feasible and advocated solutions

Elective cancer surgery in COVID-19-free surgical pathways during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: An international, multicenter, comparative cohort study

PURPOSE As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19–free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19–free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19–free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19–free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score–matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19–free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19–free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks

The impact of surgical delay on resectability of colorectal cancer: An international prospective cohort study

Aim The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has provided a unique opportunity to explore the impact of surgical delays on cancer resectability. This study aimed to compare resectability for colorectal cancer patients undergoing delayed versus non-delayed surgery. Methods This was an international prospective cohort study of consecutive colorectal cancer patients with a decision for curative surgery (January-April 2020). Surgical delay was defined as an operation taking place more than 4 weeks after treatment decision, in a patient who did not receive neoadjuvant therapy. A subgroup analysis explored the effects of delay in elective patients only. The impact of longer delays was explored in a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome was complete resection, defined as curative resection with an R0 margin. Results Overall, 5453 patients from 304 hospitals in 47 countries were included, of whom 6.6% (358/5453) did not receive their planned operation. Of the 4304 operated patients without neoadjuvant therapy, 40.5% (1744/4304) were delayed beyond 4 weeks. Delayed patients were more likely to be older, men, more comorbid, have higher body mass index and have rectal cancer and early stage disease. Delayed patients had higher unadjusted rates of complete resection (93.7% vs. 91.9%, P = 0.032) and lower rates of emergency surgery (4.5% vs. 22.5%, P &lt; 0.001). After adjustment, delay was not associated with a lower rate of complete resection (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.90-1.55, P = 0.224), which was consistent in elective patients only (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.69-1.27, P = 0.672). Longer delays were not associated with poorer outcomes. Conclusion One in 15 colorectal cancer patients did not receive their planned operation during the first wave of COVID-19. Surgical delay did not appear to compromise resectability, raising the hypothesis that any reduction in long-term survival attributable to delays is likely to be due to micro-metastatic disease

Elective Cancer Surgery in COVID-19-Free Surgical Pathways During the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic: An International, Multicenter, Comparative Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: As cancer surgery restarts after the first COVID-19 wave, health care providers urgently require data to determine where elective surgery is best performed. This study aimed to determine whether COVID-19-free surgical pathways were associated with lower postoperative pulmonary complication rates compared with hospitals with no defined pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international, multicenter cohort study included patients who underwent elective surgery for 10 solid cancer types without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Participating hospitals included patients from local emergence of SARS-CoV-2 until April 19, 2020. At the time of surgery, hospitals were defined as having a COVID-19-free surgical pathway (complete segregation of the operating theater, critical care, and inpatient ward areas) or no defined pathway (incomplete or no segregation, areas shared with patients with COVID-19). The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative pulmonary complications (pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, unexpected ventilation). RESULTS: Of 9,171 patients from 447 hospitals in 55 countries, 2,481 were operated on in COVID-19-free surgical pathways. Patients who underwent surgery within COVID-19-free surgical pathways were younger with fewer comorbidities than those in hospitals with no defined pathway but with similar proportions of major surgery. After adjustment, pulmonary complication rates were lower with COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.2% v 4.9%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.62; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86). This was consistent in sensitivity analyses for low-risk patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists grade 1/2), propensity score-matched models, and patients with negative SARS-CoV-2 preoperative tests. The postoperative SARS-CoV-2 infection rate was also lower in COVID-19-free surgical pathways (2.1% v 3.6%; aOR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.76). CONCLUSION: Within available resources, dedicated COVID-19-free surgical pathways should be established to provide safe elective cancer surgery during current and before future SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks