Abstract:The present study investigates the effects of low-energy defocused extracorporeal generated shock waves on collagen structure of cellulite affl icted skin. Cellulite measurement using high-resolution ultrasound technology was performed before and after low-energy defocused extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT) in 21 female subjects. ESWT was applied onto the skin at the lateral thigh twice a week for a period of six weeks. Results provide evidence that low-energy defocused ESWT caused remodeling of the collagen within the dermis of the tested region. Improving device-parameters and therapy regimes will be essential for future development of a scientifi c based approach to cellulite treatment. Keywords: cellulite (gynoid lipodystrophy), collagen structure of dermis, collagenometry high-resolution ultrasound of skin, low-energy defocused extracorporeal shock wave therapy (ESWT), septa of subcutaneous connective tissue

Background By improved surgical technique such as total mesorectal excision (TME), multimodal treatment and advances in imaging survival and an increased rate of sphincter preservation have been achieved in rectal cancer surgery. Minimal-invasive approaches such as laparoscopic, robotic and transanal-TME (ta-TME) enhance recovery after surgery. Nevertheless, disorders of bowel, anorectal and urogenital function are still common and need attention. Purpose This review aims at exploring the causes of dysfunction after anterior resection (AR) and the accordingly preventive strategies. Furthermore, the indication for low AR in the light of functional outcome is discussed. The last therapeutic strategies to deal with bowel, anorectal, and urogenital disorders are depicted. Conclusion Functional disorders after rectal cancer surgery are frequent and underestimated. More evidence is needed to define an indication for non-operative management or local excision as alternatives to AR. The decision for restorative resection should be made in consideration of the relevant risk factors for dysfunction. In the case of restoration, a side-to-end anastomosis should be the preferred anastomotic technique. Further high-evidence clinical studies are required to clarify the benefit of intraoperative neuromonitoring. While the function of ta-TME seems not to be superior to laparoscopy, case-control studies suggest the benefits of robotic TME mainly in terms of preservation of the urogenital function. Low AR syndrome is treated by stool regulation, pelvic floor therapy, and transanal irrigation. There is good evidence for sacral nerve modulation for incontinence after low AR.

Background Robotic-assisted colorectal surgery has gained more and more popularity over the last years. It seems to be advantageous to laparoscopic surgery in selected situations, especially in confined regions like a narrow male pelvis in rectal surgery. Whether robotic-assisted, left-sided colectomies can serve as safe training operations for less frequent, low anterior resections for rectal cancer is still under debate. Therefore, the aim of this study was to evaluate intra- and postoperative results of robotic-assisted laparoscopy (RAL) compared to laparoscopic (LSC) surgery in left-sided colectomies. Methods Between June 2015 and December 2019, 683 patients undergoing minimally invasive left-sided colectomies in two Swiss, high-volume colorectal centers were included. Intra- and postoperative outcome parameters were collected and analyzed. Results A total of 179 patients undergoing RAL and 504 patients undergoing LSC were analyzed. Baseline characteristics showed similar results. Intraoperative complications occurred in 0.6% of RAL and 2.0% of LSC patients (p = 0.193). Differences in postoperative complications graded Dindo ≥ 3 were not statistically significant (RAL 3.9% vs. LSC 6.3%, p = 0.227). Occurrence of anastomotic leakages showed no statistically significant difference [RAL n = 2 (1.1%), LSC n = 8 (1.6%), p = 0.653]. Length of hospital stay was similar in both groups. Conversions to open surgery were significantly higher in the LSC group (6.2% vs.1.7%, p = 0.018), while stoma formation was similar in both groups [RAL n = 1 (0.6%), LSC n = 5 (1.0%), p = 0.594]. Operative time was longer in the RAL group (300 vs. 210.0 min, p < 0.001). Conclusion Robotic-assisted, left-sided colectomies are safe and feasible compared to laparoscopic resections. Intra- and postoperative complications are similar in both groups. Most notably, the rate of anastomotic leakages is similar. Compared to laparoscopic resections, the analyzed robotic-assisted resections have longer operative times but less conversion rates. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm the safety of robotic-assisted, left-sided colectomies as training procedures for low anterior resections.

No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Robotic-assisted procedures are increasingly used in esophageal cancer surgery. We compared postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes following hybrid robotic-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy (Rob-E) and open Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (Open-E), performed in a single mid-volume center, in the context of evolving preoperative patient and tumor characteristics over two decades. Methods We evaluated prospectively collected data from a single center from 1999 to 2020 including 321 patients that underwent Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, 76 underwent Rob-E, and 245 Open-E. To compare perioperative outcomes, a 1:1 case-matched analysis was performed. Endpoints included postoperative morbidity and 30-day mortality. Results Preoperative characteristics revealed increased rates of adenocarcinomas and wider use of neoadjuvant treatment over time. A larger number of patients with higher ASA grades were operated with Rob-E. In case-matched cohorts, there were no differences in the overall morbidity (69.7% in Rob-E, 60.5% in Open-E, p value 0.307), highest Clavien-Dindo grade per patient (43.4% vs. 38.2% grade I or II, p value 0.321), comprehensive complication index (median 20.9 in both groups, p value 0.401), and 30-day mortality (2.6% in Rob-E, 3.9% in Open-E, p value 1.000). Similar median numbers of lymph nodes were harvested (24.5 in Rob-E, 23 in Open-E, p value 0.204), and comparable rates of R0-status (96.1% vs. 93.4%, p value 0.463) and distribution of postoperative UICC stages (overall p value 0.616) were observed. Conclusions Our study demonstrates similar postoperative complications and early oncological outcomes after Rob-E and Open-E. However, the selection criteria for Rob-E appeared to be less restrictive than those of Open-E surgery.

No abstract

Background Esophageal cancer surgery is technically highly demanding. During the past decade robot-assisted surgery has successfully been introduced in esophageal cancer treatment. Various techniques are being evaluated in different centers. In particular, advantages and disadvantages of continuously sutured (COSU) or linear-stapled (LIST) gastroesophageal anastomoses are debated. Here, we comparatively analyzed perioperative morbidities and short-term outcomes in patients undergoing hybrid robot-assisted esophageal surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), with COSU or LIST anastomoses in a single center. Methods Following standardized, effective, nCRT, 53 patients underwent a hybrid Ivor Lewis robot-assisted esophagectomy with COSU (n = 32) or LIST (n = 21) gastroesophageal anastomoses. Study endpoints were intra- and postoperative complications, in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Duration of operation, intensive care unit (ICU) and overall hospital stay were also evaluated. Furthermore, rates of rehospitalization, endoscopies, anastomotic stenosis and recurrence were assessed in a 90-day follow-up. Results Demographics, ASA scores and tumor characteristics were comparable in the two groups. Median duration of operation was similar in patients with COSU and LIST anastomosis (467 vs. 453 min, IQR 420–521 vs. 416–469, p = 0.0611). Major complications were observed in 4/32 (12.5%) and 4/21 (19%) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively (p = 0.697). Anastomotic leakage was observed in 3/32 (9.3%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 1.0) patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis, respectively. Pleural empyema occurred in 1/32 (3.1%) and 2/21 (9.5%) (p = 0.555) patients, respectively. Mortality was similar in the two groups (1/32, 3.1% and 1/21, 4.7%, p = 1.0). Median ICU stay did not differ in patients with COSU or LIST anastomosis (p = 0.255), whereas a slightly, but significantly (p = 0.0393) shorter overall hospital stay was observed for COSU, as compared to LIST cohort (median: 20 vs. 21 days, IQR 17–22 vs. 18–28). Conclusions COSU is not inferior to LIST in the performance of gastroesophageal anastomosis in hybrid Ivor Lewis operations following nCRT.