Bruce G. Wolff

535 Background: The most effective management of locally recurrent colorectal cancer (CRC) is resection. This is also true for hepatic metastases (HM). Data remains limited, however, regarding concomitant resection of recurrent CRC and HM. The aims of this study were to determine the feasibility, safety and outcomes in terms of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients undergoing concomitant resection of recurrent CRC with HM. Methods: All patients who underwent resection of recurrent CRC from 1/1995 to 1/2007 at Mayo Clinic, Rochester were reviewed (n=406). The study group consisted of patients who underwentconcomitant resection of locally recurrent CRC and hepatic resection for metastatic CRC (n= 45). Kaplan-Meier Survival was used to estimate DFS and OS. Results: The study group consisted of 27 men and 18 women. The median age was 59 years. Surgical management involved pelvic dissection in 43 patients and ileotransverse colectomy in two. 17 patients required resection of contiguous organs. 24 patients received intra-operative radiation. 34 patients underwent multiple hepatic wedge resections, 6 patients segmentectomy, 3 left hepatectomy, and 2 right hepatectomy. There was no perioperative mortality. Morbidity was 37%, 2 patients required re-operation. The 1, 3, and 5 year DFS was 72.2, 42.3, and 18.5%, respectively. The 1, 3, and 5 year OS was 87.7, 47.6, and 36.2%, respectively. Conclusions: Synchronous resection of locally recurrent CRC and HM is safe and feasible; morbidity is reasonable and mortality zero. DFS and OS in this patient population appear comparable to that of patients undergoing separate, staged resections.

The classifications of acute uncomplicated diverticulitis and complicated diverticulitis have served us well for many years. However, in recent years, we have noted the prevalence of variations of uncomplicated diverticulitis, which have not precisely fit under the classification of ‘acute resolving uncomplicated diverticulitis’, which manifests itself with the typical left lower quadrant pain, fever, diarrhea, elevated white blood count, and CT findings, such as stranding, and which resolves fairly promptly and completely on oral antibiotic therapy. For these other variations, we would suggest we use the term chronic diverticulitis, as a subset of uncomplicated diverticulitis, meaning there is no abscess, stricture, or fistula, but the episode does not respond to the usual antibiotic treatment, and there is a rebound symptomatology once the treatment has stopped, or there is continuing subliminal inflammation that continues, typically, for several weeks after the initial episode without complete resolution. This variation could also be termed ‘smoldering’ diverticulitis. A second variation of uncomplicated diverticulitis should be termed atypical diverticulitis, since this variant does not manifest all of the usual components of acute diverticulitis, particularly an absence of fever, and even white blood count elevation, and there may be a lack of diagnostic evidence of acute diverticulitis. This diagnosis must be compared with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome, and it is sometimes very difficult to distinguish between these two entities. The character of the pain in irritable bowel syndrome is typically cramping intermittently, compared with the more constant pain in smoldering diverticulitis. In our study by Horgan, McConnell, Wolff and coworkers, 5% of 930 patients who underwent sigmoid resection fit into this category of atypical uncomplicated diverticulitis. These 47 patients all had diverticulosis, and 76% that had surgery had evidence of acute and chronic inflammation, and 15% had an unsuspected pericolonic abscess. There was no mortality and a low complication mortality rate (4.2%). Complete resolution of symptoms was achieved in 76.5 with 80% being pain free. Therefore, this is mostly a diagnosis of exclusion, and clinicians must be careful to perform a thorough workup and evaluation before proceeding to surgery with this as a diagnosis. Ischemic colitis is also in the differential diagnosis, and many patients who have diverticulitis, have irritable bowel syndrome as well, so caution must be used in predicting positive outcomes after surgery in these patients.

On completion of this educational activity, learners should be better able to: (1) Appropriately counsel patients after an episode of uncomplicated diverticulitis about the risks of further episodes. (2) Evaluate the rationale for treatment of diverticular abscesses with antibiotics, percutaneous drainage, or surgery. Increasing recognition, over the past decade, that patients frequently present with complicated diverticular disease as the first episode combined with a reduction in morbidity and mortality of elective and emergency surgery has resulted in a change in the surgical management of recurrent uncomplicated diverticulitis. Patients with an episode of uncomplicated diverticular disease have an 80% chance of experiencing no further episodes. Therefore, elective sigmoid colectomy for recurrent uncomplicated disease is no longer recommended after 2 episodes. There are some high-risk patient groups including those with immunosuppression or collagen vascular diseases in whom earlier surgery is recommended. In contrast, sigmoid colectomy after an episode of complicated diverticular disease is usually recommended; although it may be safe to nonoperatively treat patients with small diverticular abscesses. To prevent recurrence after surgery it is important to ensure removal of the entire sigmoid colon and to perform an anastomosis to the upper rectum.

Purpose: We assessed risk factors for splenic injury during colectomy and associated outcomes for a 15‐year period at a single institution.Methods: All adult general surgery patients who sustained a splenic injury during colectomy at our institution from 1992 to 2007 were retrospectively identified and matched 1:1 to controls without splenic injury. Putative risk factors were assessed using paired univariate analysis and conditional logistic regression. Differences in short‐ and long‐term mortality were assessed using the log‐rank test. Results are reported as a proportion, median, or odds ratio [OR (95% confidence intervals)].Results: A total of 118 patients were included: 59 patients with splenic injury and 59 control patients. Statistically significant risk factors for splenic injury during colectomy found on univariate analysis included: splenic flexure mobilization, OR 21.00 (2.82–156.12); Charlson comorbidity index ≥5, OR 3.17 (1.26–7.93); ASA class ≥3, OR 5.33 (1.55–18.3); and nonelective surgery, OR 5.00 (1.1–22.82). On multivariate analysis, only splenic flexure mobilization was independently associated with increased risk of splenic injury (OR 18.4 (2.1–161); p = 0.0085). Splenic injured patients trended toward decrease survival both at 30 days (98 vs. 88%; p = 0.06) and at 5 years (58 vs. 55%), with a hazard ratio of 1.6 (1.0, 2.6; p = 0.05).Conclusions: Splenic flexure mobilization is the primary risk factor for splenic injury during colectomy, independent of other factors, such as higher ASA class, Charlson score, and nonelective surgery. Splenic injury during colectomy has an increased risk of death in both the short‐ and long‐term.