Over time, we observed an increase in patient exposure to thiopurine (p=0.0025), cyclosporin (p=0.0002) and anti-tumour necrosis factor (p<0.00001) coupled with a shift to laparoscopic technique (p<0.00001), stapled IPAA (p<0.00001), J pouch configuration (p<0.00001), a modified two-stage procedure (p=0.00012) and a decline in defunctioning ileostomy rate at time of IPAA (p=0.00002). Apart from pouchitis, there was no significant difference in surgical and chronic inflammatory pouch outcomes with time.
 
  Despite greater patient exposure to immunomodulatory and biologic therapy pre surgery coupled with a significant change in surgical techniques, surgical and chronic inflammatory pouch outcome rates have remained stable.
 Despite greater patient exposure to immunomodulatory and biologic therapy pre surgery coupled with a significant change in surgical techniques, surgical and chronic inflammatory pouch outcome rates have remained stable.
  Guaiac fecal occult blood test (gFOBT) has been the standard for colorectal screening but it has low sensitivity and specificity. This study evaluated the use of fecal tumor M2-pyruvate kinase (M2-PK) for detection of colorectal cancer and to compare with the current surveillance tool; gFOBT in symptomatic adult subjects underwent colonoscopy.
 
  Stool samples were collected prospectively from symptomatic adults who had elective colonoscopy from September 2014 to January 2016 and were analyzed with the ScheBo M2-PK Quick test and laboratory detection of fecal hemoglobin.
 
  The results were correlated to the colonoscopy findings and/or histopathology report. Eighty-five subjects (age of 56.8 ± 15.3 years [mean ± standard deviation]) were recruited with a total of 17 colorectal cancer (20.0%) and 10 colorectal adenoma patients (11.8%). The sensitivity of M2-PK test in colorectal cancer detection was higher than gFOBT (100% vs. 64.7%). M2-PK test had a lower specificity when compared to gFOBT (72.5% vs. 88.2%) in colorectal cancer detection. The positive and negative predictive values were 47.2% and 100% for M2-PK test and 57.9% and 90.9% for gFOBT.
 
  Fecal M2-PK Quick test has a high sensitivity for detection of colorectal cancer when compared to gFOBT, making it the potential choice for colorectal tumor screening biomarker in the future.
 Fecal M2-PK Quick test has a high sensitivity for detection of colorectal cancer when compared to gFOBT, making it the potential choice for colorectal tumor screening biomarker in the future.
  There is no clear evidence of the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in stage IIA colon cancer. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the prognostic factors and survival benefit of AC in this disease.
 
  A retrospective data collection for patients who underwent radical surgery for colon cancer between January 2008 and December 2015 was undertaken. The cohort was divided into the no-AC and AC groups.
 
  We included 227 patients with stage IIA colon cancer in our study cohort, including 67 and 160 patients in the no-AC and AC groups, respectively. The number of retrieved lymph nodes and the presence of tumor complications as obstruction or perforation were independent risk factors for survival. In the no-AC group, there was a significant difference in survival according to the number of retrieved lymph nodes. In the AC group, there were significant differences in survival according to sidedness and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). There was no significant difference in survival between the no-AC and the AC groups.
 
  The number of retrieved lymph nodes and the presence of tumor complications were prognostic factors for stage IIA colon cancer but lymphovascular and perineural invasion were not. Sidedness and preoperative CEA could be used as factors to predict the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Currently, it is believed that there is no benefit of AC for stage IIA colon cancer. Further studies are needed to determine the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IIA colon cancer.
 The number of retrieved lymph nodes and the presence of tumor complications were prognostic factors for stage IIA colon cancer but lymphovascular and perineural invasion were not. Sidedness and preoperative CEA could be used as factors to predict the benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy. Currently, it is believed that there is no benefit of AC for stage IIA colon cancer. Further studies are needed to determine the survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy in stage IIA colon cancer.
  This study aims to evaluate surgical outcomes (i.e. length of stay, 30-day morbidity, mortality, reoperation, and readmission rates) with the use of the ERAS pathway, and determine its association with the rate of compliance to the different ERAS components.
 
  This was a prospective cohort of patients, who underwent the following elective procedures stoma reversal (SR), colon resection (CR), and rectal resection (RR). The primary endpoint was to determine the association of compliance to an ERAS pathway and surgical outcomes. These were then compared to outcomes prior to the implementation of ERAS.
 
  A total of 267 patients were included in the study. The overall compliance to the ERAS component was 92% (SR91.75%, CR93.06%, RR90.65%). There was an associated decrease in morbidity rates across all types of surgery, as compliance to ERAS increased. The average total LOS decreased in all groups but was only found to have statistical significance in SR (12.06 ± 6.67 vs 10.02 ± 5.43 days; p=0.002) and RR (19.85 ± 11.38 vs 16.85 ± 10.45 days; p=0.04) groups.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/sj6986.html  Decreased postoperative LOS was noted in all groups. Morbidity rates were significantly higher after ERAS implementation, but reoperation and mortality rates were found to be similar.
 
  Implementation of ERAS improved outcomes, particularly length of stay. Although an actual increase in morbidity was noted, that may be explained by the improved reporting and documentation that accompanied the implementation of the protocol, a decreased likelihood of developing complications is foreseen with increased compliance to ERAS.
 Implementation of ERAS improved outcomes, particularly length of stay. Although an actual increase in morbidity was noted, that may be explained by the improved reporting and documentation that accompanied the implementation of the protocol, a decreased likelihood of developing complications is foreseen with increased compliance to ERAS.