S128: Active post discharge surveillance program as a part of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol decreases emergency department visits and readmissions in colorectal patients.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs aim to standardize perioperative care to reduce morbidity and cost. Our study examined an Active Post-Discharge Surveillance (APDS) program in reducing avoidable readmissions and emergency department (ED) visits in postoperative colorectal ERAS patients. METHODS: Colectomy (right, subtotal and total) and low anterior resection cases performed at a tertiary care hospital between 2015 and 2018 were reviewed. ED visits, 30-day readmissions, and patients' APDS participation were assessed. Our APDS followed a modern text messaging paradigm offered to all patients free-of-charge. RESULTS: Of 236 patients that underwent colectomy, 123 utilized APDS and 113 did not. Overall, both non-surveillance (NS) and active surveillance (AS) groups had similar preoperative characteristics. Length of hospital stay at index surgery was longer in the NS compared to AS group, 4.7 ± 2.6 vs. 2.6 ± 2.8 days, respectively (p < 0.001). In the NS group, 16 patients visited the ED, of which 14 (14/16, 87.5%) were ultimately readmitted. One patient was directly readmitted from the surgeon's office, resulting in a total of 15 (15/113, 13.3%) total patients readmitted by postoperative day (POD) 30. In the AS group, 9 patients visited the ED, of which 7 (7/9, 77.8%) were ultimately readmitted. One patient was directly readmitted, resulting in a total of 8 (8/123, 6.5%) total patients readmitted by POD 30. AS patients had significantly lower odds of visiting the ED when compared to NS patients (OR: 0.356; 95% CI: 0.138-0.919; p = 0.0328). Similarly, AS patients had significantly lower odds of readmission when compared to NS patients (OR: 0.343; 95% CI: 0.132-0.892; p = 0.0283). CONCLUSIONS: APDS allows many postoperative issues to be resolved in outpatient settings without ER visits or readmission. This indicates APDS is a valuable ERAS adjunct by establishing a cost-effective and convenient communication line between patients and their surgical team.

Sigmoid Colectomy for Acute Diverticulitis in Immunosuppressed vs Immunocompetent Patients: Outcomes From the ACS-NSQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: The management of acute diverticulitis in immunosuppressed patients is increasingly debated. The appropriate timing and type of operation remains controversial. OBJECTIVE: This study examines the impact of immunosuppression on mortality and morbidity following colectomies for diverticulitis in the emergency and elective settings. DESIGN SETTINGS: With the use of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, the outcomes of immunosuppressed compared with immunocompetent patients who underwent colectomy for acute diverticulitis were compared. PATIENTS: The multi-institutional database was queried for patients who underwent colectomy for acute diverticulitis from 2005 to 2012. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The impact of immunosuppression on mortality, major morbidity, organ space infection, infectious complications, and wound dehiscence was assessed. RESULTS: Of 26,987 patients, 1332 were immunosuppressed and 25,655 were immunocompetent; 4271 patients had emergency (596 immunosuppressed and 3675 immunocompetent) and 22,716 patients had elective (736 immunosuppressed and 21,980 immunocompetent) colectomies for diverticulitis. In both groups, mortality and major morbidity were significantly higher in the emergency (immunosuppressed 16% and 45%, immunocompetent 4% and 28%) compared with the elective setting (immunosuppressed 2% and 25%, immunocompetent 0.4% and 12%), p < 0.001. On multivariate regression for the emergency setting, immunosuppression significantly increased mortality (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.17-2.75) and did not significantly increase morbidity. On multivariate regression for the elective setting, mortality was similar in immunosuppressed and immunocompetent groups; however, major morbidity (OR, 1.46; 95% CI, 1.17-1.83) and wound dehiscence (OR, 2.69; 95% CI, 1.63-4.42) were significantly increased in immunosuppressed compared with immunocompetent patients. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective design and standardized outcomes are based on heterogeneous data. CONCLUSIONS: Emergency colectomy for diverticulitis is associated with higher mortality in immunosuppressed than in immunocompetent patients, whereas elective colectomy is associated with comparable mortality. In the elective setting, immunosuppressed compared with immunocompetent patients are at increased risk of major morbidity and wound dehiscence.

Aortic root pseudoaneurysm after blunt trauma to chest - an interesting case.

Acquired pseudoaneurysms of the aortic root involving the sinus of Valsalva are rare and serious complications arising from trauma, infection, or following cardiac surgery or intervention. We describe the surgical treatment of a patient who had acquired sinus of Valsalva pseudoaneurysm following blunt trauma to chest; wherein pericardial patch closure of the orifice of the pseudoaneurysm without aortic valve replacement or coronary artery bypass grafting. The management of these sinus of Valsalva pseudoaneurysms depends on the underlying mechanism causing symptoms such as compression or thrombosis of coronary artery; or the defective anatomy involving sinus of Valsalva, aortic valve or the coronary artery.

Healing by primary versus secondary intention after surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus.

BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus arises in the hair follicles in the buttock cleft. The estimated incidence is 26 per 100,000, people, affecting men twice as often as women. These chronic discharging wounds cause pain and impact upon quality of life. Surgical strategies centre on excision of the sinus tracts followed by primary closure and healing by primary intention or leaving the wound open to heal by secondary intention. There is uncertainty as to whether open or closed surgical management is more effective. OBJECTIVES: To determine the relative effects of open compared with closed surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus on the outcomes of time to healing, infection and recurrence rate. SEARCH STRATEGY: For this first update we searched the Wounds Group Specialised Register (24/9/09); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) - The Cochrane Library Issue 3 2009; Ovid MEDLINE (1950 - September Week 3, 2009); Ovid MEDLINE(R) In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations (September 24, 2009); Ovid EMBASE (1980 - 2009 Week 38); EBSCO CINAHL (1982 - September Week 3, 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing open with closed surgical treatment for pilonidal sinus. Exclusion criteria were: non-RCTs; children aged younger than 14 years and studies of pilonidal abscess. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted independently by three review authors (AA/IM/JB). Mean differences were used for continuous outcomes and relative risks with 95% confidence intervals for dichotomous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: For this update, 8 additional trials were identified giving a total of 26 included studies (n=2530). 17 studies compared open wound healing with surgical closure. Healing times were faster after surgical closure compared with open healing. Surgical site infection (SSI) rates did not differ between treatments; recurrence rates were lower in open healing than with primary closure (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.87). Six studies compared surgical midline with off-midline closure. Healing times were faster after off-midline closure (MD 5.4 days, 95% CI 2.3 to 8.5). SSI rates were higher after midline closure (RR 3.72, 95% CI 1.86 to 7.42) and recurrence rates were higher after midline closure (Peto OR 4.54, 95% CI 2.30 to 8.96). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: No clear benefit was shown for open healing over surgical closure. A clear benefit was shown in favour of off-midline rather than midline wound closure. When closure of pilonidal sinuses is the desired surgical option, off-midline closure should be the standard management.

Rectal Cancer Complete Response Outcomes in a Community-Based Hospital Comparable with Large Cancer Centers When Multidisciplinary Approach to Rectal Cancer Is Used.

Achievement of pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer correlates with improved prognosis relative to non-pCR counterparts. Such correlations are not well established in the context of a community-based hospital. This study aims to examine pCR rates, recurrences, and survival data for locally advanced rectal cancer patients in community settings. A single-center retrospective chart review was performed at a community-based hospital. Study population consisted of 119 patients with locally advanced rectal cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, followed by surgical resection. Patients with a history of metastasis, inflammatory bowel disease, hereditary cancer syndromes, concurrent or prior malignancy, and emergent surgery were excluded. Twenty-four patients (20.2%) achieved pCR. Across both groups, all demographics and perioperative characteristics were comparable. The five-year survival was 73.7 per cent in the non-pCR group and 95.8 per cent in the pCR group (P = 0.0243). At five years, 27.7 per cent of the non-pCR group had a recurrence, as compared with none in the pCR group (P = 0.0018). Based on our study, we believe that a multidisciplinary approach to rectal cancer used at a community-based hospital can achieve oncological outcomes and survival benefits similar to those of larger academic tertiary care institutions.

Normalization of CEA Levels Post-Neoadjuvant Therapy is a Strong Predictor of Pathologic Complete Response in Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Recent attention has been focused on the relationship between carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and pathological complete response (pCR), without consensus regarding its predictive value. This study aims to examine the association between CEA and pCR. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of all patients who underwent primary rectal cancer resection after neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT). Patients were divided into two groups, pCR or no-pCR, based on final pathology. CEA levels were measured at the initial visit with the surgeon/oncologist and post-completion of nCRT. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-one patients underwent primary rectal cancer resections after nCRT. Nineteen patients (13.5 %) achieved pCR, while 122 (86.5 %) had no-pCR. Pre-nCRT CEA levels were not significantly different between groups (2.75 vs 4.5 µg/L, p = 0.65). However, post-nCRT CEA levels were significantly lower in patients with pCR (1.7 vs 2.4 µg/L, p < 0.01). On multivariate logistic regression analyses, low post-nCRT CEA level was an independent predictor of pCR (OR 1.74, CI 1.06, 3.81) and normalization of CEA from an initially elevated level was a highly significant predictor of pCR (OR 64.8, CI 2.53, 18,371). CONCLUSION: Low post-nCRT CEA is an independent predictor of pCR, and normalization of CEA post-nCRT is a strong predictor of pCR.