Abstract Introduction Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has revolutionized the surgical techniques for lower-third rectal cancer. The aim of the present study was to analyze the outcomes of quality indicators of TaTME for rectal cancer compared with laparoscopic TME (LaTME). Methods A cohort prospective study with 50 (14 female and 36male) patients, with a mean age of 67 (range: 55.75 to 75.25) years, who underwent surgery for rectal cancer. In total, 20 patients underwent TaTME, and 30, LaTME. Every TaTME procedure was performed by experienced colorectal surgeons. The sample was divided into two groups (TaTME and LaTME), and the quality indicators of the surgery for rectal cancer were analyzed. Results There were no statistically significant differences regarding the patients and the main characteristics of the tumor (age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] score, body mass index [BMI], tumoral stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and distance from the tumor to the external anal margin) between the two groups. The rates of: postoperativemorbidity (TaTME: 35%; LaTME: 30%; p=0.763);mortality (0%); anastomotic leak (TaTME: 10%; LaTME: 13%; p=0.722); wound infection (TaTME: 0%; LaTME: 3.3%; p=0.409); reoperation (TaTME: 5%; LaTME: 6.6%; p=0.808); and readmission (TaTME: 5%; LaTME: 0%; p=0.400), as well as the length of the hospital stay (TaTME: 13.5 days; LaTME: 11 days; p=0.538), were similar in both groups. There were no statistically significant differences in the rates of positive circumferential resection margin (TaTME: 5%; LaTME: 3.3%; p=0.989) and positive distal resection margin (TaTME: 0%; LaTME: 3.3%; p=0.400), the completeness of the TME (TaTME: 100%; LaTME: 100%), and the number of lymph nodes harvested (TaTME: 15; LaTME: 15.5; p=0.882) between two groups. Conclusion Transanal total mesorectal excision is a safe and feasible surgical procedure for middle/lower-third rectal cancer.

Abstract Introduction The Covid-19 pandemic has had an important impact on colorectal cancer surgery, for hospital resources had to be redistributed in favour of Covid-19 patients. The aim of the present study is to analyze our results in colorectal oncologic surgery during the Covid-19 pandemic in patients with and without perioperative SARSCoV- 2 infection. Methods In total, 32 patients (19 male and 13 female patients), with a mean age of 64 years (range: 57.2 to 69.5 years) with colorectal cancer underwent surgery under the recommendations of surgical societies included in a protocol. Data collection included clinical characteristics (gender, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, tumor location, preoperative staging, lymphopenia), data related to SARS-CoV-2 infection (postoperative symptoms, diagnostic tests), operative details (surgical procedure, approach, duration, stoma), pathological outcomes (tumor stage, number of lymph nodes harvested, distal and circumferential radial margins, quality of the total mesorectal excision), and surgical outcomes (morbidity, mortality, hospital stay, and the rates of reoperation and readmission). Results A total of 3 (9.4%) patients who underwent colorectal surgery during the Covid-19 pandemic were infected by SARS-CoV-2 in the postoperative period. Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was associated with Covid-19 (6.2% versus 33.3%; p=0.042), and surgical morbidity was higher among Covid-19 patients (100% versus 37.9%; p=0.039). There were not significant differences between COVID-19 patients and non-COVID-19 patients in relation to the rest of the analyzed outcomes. Conclusion During the Covid-19 pandemic, colorectal cancer surgery should be performed according to the recommendations of surgical societies. However, Covid- 19 patients could present a higher morbidity rate.

RESUMO Objetivo: Investigar como os sintomas variam de acordo com a posição do apêndice em pacientes pediátricos e demonstrar que a laparoscopia é segura e eficaz em qualquer posição do apêndice, comparando-as. Métodos: Os prontuários de 1.736 pacientes pediátricos com idade ≤14 anos submetidos à apendicectomia laparoscópica em um período de 14 anos foram analisados retrospectivamente. Os pacientes foram divididos de acordo com a posição do apêndice: anterior, pélvica, retrocecal e sub-hepático. Os testes de Kruskal-Wallis e do qui-quadrado foram usados com a correção de Bonferroni, sendo significante p<0,05. Resultados: A posição do apêndice era anterior em 1.366 casos, retrocecal em 248 casos, pélvica em 66 casos e sub-hepática em 56 casos. Não houve diferenças significativas entre os grupos quanto às variáveis idade e sexo. A dor abdominal foi a única variável com diferenças estatisticamente significantes entre os grupos. A taxa de apêndice perfurado foi superior nas posições sub-hepática e pélvica. As complicações intraoperatórias e a taxa de conversão não foram estatisticamente significativas. As dificuldades técnicas e o tempo cirúrgico foram superiores em posição sub-hepática. A taxa de complicações pós-operatórias foi semelhante entre as diferentes posições, exceto a obstrução intestinal, que foi superior em posição pélvica. Conclusões: Os sintomas da apendicite dificilmente variam com a posição do apêndice. A laparoscopia é segura e eficaz, independentemente da posição do apêndice.

ABSTRACT Objective: To investigate how symptoms vary according to the appendiceal position in pediatric patients and to demonstrate that the laparoscopic approach is safe and effective in any appendiceal location by comparing each location to another. Methods: The medical records of 1,736 children aged 14 or younger who underwent laparoscopic appendectomy over a period of 14 years were analyzed retrospectively. Patients were divided according to the position of the appendiceal tip into four groups: anterior, pelvic, retrocecal and subhepatic. The Kruskal-Wallis and chi-square tests were used with the Bonferroni correction, with a significant p<0.05. Results: The appendiceal location was anterior in 1,366 cases, retrocecal in 248 cases, pelvic in 66 cases and subhepatic in 56 cases. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of patient age and gender. Abdominal pain was the only symptom with statistically significant differences between the groups. The rate of perforated appendicitis was higher in the subhepatic and pelvic positions. Intraoperative complications and conversions were not statistically significant. Technical difficulties and operative time were higher in subhepatic position. The rate of postoperative complications was similar between the different locations, except for bowel obstruction, which was higher in pelvic appendicitis. Conclusions: The clinical symptoms of appendicitis hardly ever change with the position of the appendix. The laparoscopic approach is safe and effective, regardless the appendiceal location.