Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) are dedicated to ensuring high-quality innovative patient care for surgical patients by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus as well as minimally invasive surgery. The ASCRS and SAGES society members involved in the creation of these guidelines were chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery and enhanced recovery. This consensus document was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus and develop clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. While not proscriptive, these guidelines provide information on which decisions can be made and do not dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, healthcare workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. These guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient. This clinical practice guideline represents a collaborative effort between the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and was approved by both societies.

The Association Between Sex and Survival for Anal Squamous Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) is rising, despite the introduction of a vaccine against human papillomavirus (HPV), the most common etiology of anal SCC. The rate of anal SCC is higher among women and sex-based survival differences may exist. We aimed to examine the association between sex and survival for stage I-IV anal SCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with stage I-IV anal SCC from 2004-2016. Outcomes were assessed utilizing log rank tests, Kaplan-Meier statistics, and Cox proportional-hazard modeling. Subgroup analyses by disease stage and by HPV status were performed. Outcomes of interest were median, 1-, and 5-year survival by sex. RESULTS: There were 31,185 patients with stage I-IV anal SCC. 10,714 (34.3%) were male and 20,471 (65.6%) were female. 1- and 5- year survival was 90.2% (95% CI 89.8 - 90.7) and 67.7% (95% CI 66.9 - 68.5) for females compared to 85.8% (95% CI 85.1 - 86.5) and 55.9% (95% CI 54.7 - 57.0) for males. In subgroup analysis, females demonstrated improved unadjusted and adjusted survival for all stages of disease. Female sex was an independent predictor of improved survival (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.65 - 0.71, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate better overall survival for females compared to males for stage I-IV anal SCC. It is not clear why women have a survival advantage over men, though exposure to prominent risk factors may play a role. High-risk men may warrant routine screening for anal cancer.

Anatomic Distribution of Colorectal Adenocarcinoma in Young Patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of colorectal cancer has increased in the younger population. Studies show an increased prevalence of left-sided tumors in younger patients; however, exact anatomic distribution is not known. OBJECTIVE: We sought to determine the anatomic distribution of colorectal cancer in young patients and to calculate the proportion of tumors that would be within reach of a flexible sigmoidoscopy. DESIGN: The National Cancer Database (2004-2015) was used to identify patients with colorectal cancer. SETTINGS: This was a multicenter study using national data. PATIENTS: The study included 117,686 patients under the age of 50 years diagnosed with colorectal cancer and 1,331,048 patients over the age of 50 years diagnosed with colorectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of left-sided tumors in patients under the age of 50 years. RESULTS: A total of 74.4% of patients under age 50 years and 56.1% of patients over age 50 years had left-sided colorectal cancer. LIMITATIONS: The study is a retrospective review and does not exclude young patients who developed colorectal cancer with familial syndromes with a colorectal cancer disposition. CONCLUSIONS: A total of 74.4% of colorectal cancers diagnosed before age 50 years are left sided. In light of recent changes to screening recommendations, distribution of disease in young patients is important to both provider and patient education and decision-making. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A966.

Survival Outcomes for Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma at Academic Versus Community Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma is a rare disease with poor outcomes. Cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy is the cornerstone of therapy. We aim to compare outcomes of malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated at academic versus community hospitals. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database to identify patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma from 2004 to 2016. Patients were divided according to treating facility type: academic or community. Outcomes were assessed using log-rank tests, Cox proportional-hazard modeling, and Kaplan-Meier survival statistics. RESULTS: In total, 2682 patients with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma were identified. A total of 1272 (47.4%) were treated at an academic facility and 1410 (52.6%) were treated at a community facility. Five hundred forty-six (42.9%) of patients at academic facilities underwent debulking or radical surgery compared to 286 (20.2%) at community facilities. Three hundred sixty-six (28.8%) of patients at academic facilities received chemotherapy on the same day as surgery compared to 147 (10.4%) of patients at community facilities. Unadjusted 5-year survival was 29.7% (95% CI 26.7-32.7) for academic centers compared to 18.3% (95% CI 16.0-20.7) for community centers. In multivariable analysis, community facility was an independent predictor of increased risk of death (HR: 1.19, 95% CI 1.08-1.32, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate better survival outcomes for malignant peritoneal mesothelioma treated at academic compared to community facilities. Patients at academic centers underwent surgery and received chemotherapy on the same day as surgery more frequently than those at community centers, suggesting that malignant peritoneal mesothelioma patients may be better served at experienced academic centers.

The Effect of Facility Volume on Survival Following Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies assessing colorectal cancer survival have reported better outcomes when operations are performed at high-volume centers. These studies have largely been cross-sectional, making it difficult to interpret their estimates. We aimed to assess the effect of facility volume on survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer. METHODS: Using data from the National Cancer Database, we included all patients with complete baseline information who underwent proctectomy for non-metastatic rectal cancer between 2004 and 2016. Facility volume was defined as the number of rectal cancer cases managed at the treating center in the calendar year prior to the patient's surgery. Overall survival estimates were obtained for facility volumes ranging from 10 to 100 cases/year. Follow-up began on the day of surgery and continued until loss to follow-up or death. RESULTS: A total of 52,822 patients were eligible. Patients operated on at hospitals with volumes of 10, 30, and 50 cases/year had similar distributions of grade, clinical stage, and neoadjuvant therapies. 1-, 3-, and 5-year survival all improved with increasing facility volume. One-year survival was 94.0% (95% CI: 93.7, 94.3) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 94.5% (95% CI: 94.2, 94.7) for 30 cases/year, and 94.8% (95% CI: 94.5, 95.0) for 50 cases/year. Five-year survival was 68.9% (95% CI: 68.0, 69.7) for hospitals that performed 10 cases/year, 70.8% (95% CI: 70.1, 71.5) for 30 cases/year, and 72.0% (95% CI: 71.2, 72.8) for 50 cases/year. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment at a higher volume facility results in improved survival following proctectomy for rectal cancer, though the small benefits are less profound than previously reported.

Rectal-prolapse repair in men is safe, but outcomes are not well understood.

INTRODUCTION: Rectal prolapse is a condition that occurs infrequently in men and there is little literature guiding treatment in this population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgical approach and outcomes of rectal-prolapse repair in men. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter review was conducted of consecutive men who underwent rectal-prolapse repair between 2004 and 2014. Surgical approaches and outcomes, including erectile function and fecal continence, were evaluated. RESULTS: During the study period, 58 men underwent rectal-prolapse repair and the mean age of repair was 52.7 ± 24.1 years. The mean follow-up was 13.2 months (range, 0.5-117 months). The majority of patients underwent endoscopic evaluation (78%), but few patients underwent anal manometry (16%), defecography (9%) or ultrasound (3%). Ten patients (17%) underwent biofeedback/pelvic-floor physical therapy prior to repair. Nineteen patients (33%) underwent a perineal approach (most were perineal proctosigmoidectomy). Thirty-nine patients (67%) underwent repair using an abdominal approach (all were suture rectopexy) and, of these, 77% were completed using a minimally invasive technique. The overall complication rate was 26% including urinary retention (16%), which was more common in patients undergoing the perineal approach (32% vs. 8%, P = 0.028), urinary-tract infection (7%) and wound infection (3%). The overall recurrence rate was 9%, with no difference between abdominal and perineal approaches. Information on sexual function was missing in the majority of patients  both before and after surgery (76% and 78%, respectively). CONCLUSION:  Rectal-prolapse repair in men is safe and has a low recurrence rate; however, sexual function was poorly recorded across all institutions. Further studies are needed to evaluate to best approach to and functional outcomes of rectal-prolapse repair in men.

The ACGME competencies in the operating room.

BACKGROUND: In 1999, the ACGME introduced the 6 competencies that have become the basis for resident education. Since the operating room (OR) has traditionally been the major focus for resident teaching in surgery, we performed an observational study to determine whether it is an appropriate setting for the teaching and/or assessment of the competencies. METHODS: A 3-person team observed 11 operations and recorded all teaching events. Observers then determined whether each event involved the teaching of a competency by faculty or demonstration of a competency by residents. Frequency counts, mean times, and ranges were calculated for each competency taught and demonstrated. RESULTS: The Patient Care competency was both the most commonly taught and demonstrated. Faculty spent an average of 33% of operative time instructing in patient care, and residents demonstrated it 65% of the time. The Interpersonal/Communication Skills (4%) and Practice-Based Learning/Improvement (4%) competencies were also occasionally demonstrated by residents. The remaining competencies were addressed less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: OR teaching was primarily devoted to the Patient Care competency. The OR was also an appropriate setting for evaluating resident performance in this area. New approaches to OR teaching or educational efforts in other settings such as the clinic are necessary for teaching and assessing the remaining competencies.

Surgical residents' perceptions of the effects of the ACGME duty hour requirements 1 year after implementation.

BACKGROUND: In July 2003, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education implemented nationwide requirements on resident duty hours with the aim of improving quality of care. Our objectives were (1) to determine the extent and means of compliance with the ACGME requirements within general surgery residency programs and (2) to examine general surgery residents' perceptions of the effects of the ACGME requirements on patient care and residents' training experience. METHODS: A survey was mailed to residents in 19 New England general surgery programs in spring 2004 (n=238). RESULTS: The overall response rate was 36%. More than 89% of respondents reported that the requirements generally were being enforced, and respondents' mean work hours (80.8 +/- 11.7 per week) supported this claim. Forty-three percent felt that quality of care had deteriorated. Although 70% perceived decrements in continuity of care, only 32% believed that the risk of patient management errors had increased. Sixty percent reported doing fewer operations, and half felt that residents missed out on too many learning opportunities. Yet, only 39% reported that the requirements had worsened the quality of training. Residents consistently reported an improved quality of life. Seventy-five percent felt that, overall, the requirements were a good thing. CONCLUSIONS: Most surgical residents do not believe that the ACGME duty hour requirements have had their intended effect of improving quality of care and are ambivalent about effects on the quality of their training. However, they report an improved quality of life, and most residents do support the requirements overall.

The future of surgery: today's residents speak.

INTRODUCTION: New Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) resident duty hour requirements were implemented in July 2003. A recent study suggests that these requirements have resulted in substantial work-hour reductions and improvements in quality of life for general surgery residents. The impact of these changes on the culture of surgery and attitudes about future practice patterns among current surgical residents is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To characterize future practice patterns desired by the current generation of general surgery residents. METHODS: A confidential survey was administered to all residents enrolled in 21 general surgery residency programs in New England (n = 668). RESULTS: Completed responses were received from 238 residents. Three quarters of the respondents wish to limit their practice to a subspecialty, and two thirds wish to work 60 hours or less per week as attending surgeons. About one quarter find a job-sharing arrangement desirable. Seventy-one percent report that being on-call for their patients at all times with no night or weekend cross-coverage would be undesirable. Over 90% desire sharing on-call responsibilities with members of a group. Over one quarter would feel comfortable allowing cross-covering colleagues to manage their operative complications routinely, including reoperation. Over one quarter would pass off a scheduled operation that was delayed into the night or weekend. CONCLUSIONS: The current surgical residents desire practice patterns that substantially differ from those of today's surgeons. To the extent that these attitudes spring from changes in resident working conditions wrought by the ACGME duty hour requirements, these requirements have the potential to change the nature of surgical practice in this country.

An Apprenticeship Rotation Teaches Chief Residents Nontechnical Skills and ACGME Core Competencies.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, surgical training has used an apprenticeship model but has more recently moved to a service-based model, with groups of residents working with groups of attending surgeons. We developed an apprenticeship rotation to enhance one-on-one interaction between chief residents and selected faculty. We hypothesized that the apprenticeship rotation would be effective for teaching nontechnical skills (NTS) and core competencies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An apprenticeship rotation was created at a university-based surgery residency in which each chief resident selected a single attending surgeon with whom to work exclusively with for a 4-week period. Emphasis was placed on teaching intraoperative NTS as well as the 4 difficult-to-teach Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education core competencies (DCC): Interpersonal and Communication Skills, Practice-Based Learning and Improvement, Professionalism, and Systems-Based Practice. Participants were surveyed afterwards about their rotation using a 5-point Likert scale. A Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to compare differences depending on data distribution. RESULTS: All (13/13) the chief residents and 67% (8/12) faculty completed the survey. Overall, 85% of residents and 87.5% of faculty would recommend the rotation to other residents/faculty members. Both residents and faculty reported improvement in trainees' technical skills and NTS. Residents reported improvement in all 4 DCC, particularly, Practice-Based Learning and Improvement, Professionalism, and Interpersonal and Communication Skills. CONCLUSION: The apprenticeship rotation is an effective means of teaching residents both NTS and DCC essential for independent practice. Consideration should be given to introducing this program into surgical curricula nationally.

Management and complications of stomas.

Stomas are created for a wide range of indications such as temporary protection of a high-risk anastomosis, diversion of sepsis, or permanent relief of obstructed defecation or incontinence. Yet this seemingly benign procedure is associated with an overall complication rate of up to 70%. Therefore, surgeons caring for patients with gastrointestinal diseases must be proficient not only with stoma creation but also with managing postoperative stoma-related complications. This article reviews the common complications associated with ostomy creation and strategies for their management.

Educational value of the operating room experience during a core surgical clerkship.

BACKGROUND: The amount and content of medical student teaching in the operating room and its alignment with clerkship goals was unknown. METHODS: A qualitative research design using field observations, followed by qualitative and quantitative data coding and analysis. RESULTS: A mean of 9.8% of the total case time (range 1.6%-20.2%) was spent teaching clerkship goals. Teaching strategies based on basic principles of learning were used during a mean of 66% of the total case time (range 30%-99%). The most common teaching strategy was active student participation (28%) followed by command (14%) and lecture (13%). Educational experience in the OR was rated 4.0 (out of 5) by faculty and 3.3 by students. No correlation existed between student satisfaction and time actively participating in the operation or time spent teaching to clerkship goals (P = .66, P = .95, respectively). CONCLUSION: Teaching in the OR is more focused on technical aspects of the operation than the goals of a core surgery clerkship.

Severe acute gastrointestinal graft-vs-host disease: an emerging surgical dilemma in contemporary cancer care.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the natural history of and guidelines for the surgical management of severe acute gastrointestinal (GI) graft-vs-host disease (GVHD) after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). DESIGN: Case series from a prospective database. SETTING: Tertiary care referral center/National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center. PATIENTS: A total of 63 of 2065 patients (3%) undergoing HSCT for hematologic malignancies from February 1997 to March 2005 diagnosed clinically with severe (stage 3 or 4) acute GI GVHD. Main Outcome Measure Percutaneous or surgical intervention. Perforation, obstruction, ischemia, hemorrhage, and abscess were considered surgically correctable problems. RESULTS: Severe acute GI GVHD was diagnosed in 63 patients (median age at HSCT, 47.6 years) at a median of 23 days after HSCT. Clinical diagnosis was confirmed histologically in 84% of patients. On computed tomography and/or magnetic resonance images, 64% had bowel wall thickening, 20% had a normal-appearing bowel, and 16% had nonspecific findings; none had evidence of perforation, obstruction, or abscess. All were initially treated with immunosuppression. Only 1 patient (1.6%) required intervention, undergoing a nontherapeutic laparotomy for worsening abdominal pain. A total of 83% of patients have died (median time to death from HSCT, 119 days; from GI GVHD diagnosis, 85 days). None who underwent an autopsy died of a surgically correctable cause. CONCLUSIONS: This series represents a large single-center experience with GI GVHD reviewed from a surgical perspective. Operative intervention was rarely required. Therefore, mature surgical judgment is necessary to confirm the absence of surgically reversible problems, thus avoiding unnecessary operations in this challenging patient population.

Distal pancreatectomy is not associated with increased perioperative morbidity when performed as part of a multivisceral resection.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the indications for and the outcomes from distal pancreatectomy. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 171 patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy at Brigham and Women's Hospital between January 1996 and August 2005. RESULTS: Nearly one-third of distal pancreatectomies were performed as part of an en bloc resection for a contiguous or metastatic tumor. Fifty-six percent of the patients underwent a standard distal pancreatectomy +/- splenectomy (group 1), whereas 44% of distal pancreatic resections included additional organs or contiguous intraperitoneal or retroperitoneal tumor (group 2). The overall post-operative complication rate was 37%; the most common complication was pancreatic duct leak (23%). When compared to patients undergoing standard distal pancreatectomy, those with a more extensive resection including multiple viscera and/or metastatic or contiguous tumor resection had no significant difference in overall complication rate (35% v. 39%, p = 0.75), leak rate (25% v. 20%, p = 0.47), new-onset insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (3% v. 4%, p = 1.0), and mortality (2% v. 4%, p = 0.656). CONCLUSION: This series includes a large number of patients in whom distal pancreatectomy was performed as part of a multivisceral resection or with en bloc resection of contiguous tumor. Complications were no different in these patients when compared to patients undergoing straightforward distal pancreatectomy.