EAES, SAGES, and ESCP rapid guideline: bowel preparation for minimally invasive colorectal resection.

BACKGROUND: Variation exists in practice pertaining to bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery. A survey of EAES members prioritized this topic to be addressed by a clinical practice guideline. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to develop evidence-informed clinical practice recommendations on the use of bowel preparation before minimally invasive colorectal surgery, through evidence synthesis and a structured evidence-to-decision framework by an interdisciplinary panel of stakeholders. METHODS: This is a collaborative project of EAES, SAGES, and ESCP. We updated a previous systematic review and performed a network meta-analysis of interventions. We appraised the certainty of the evidence for each comparison, using the GRADE and CINeMA methods. A panel of general and colorectal surgeons, infectious diseases specialists, an anesthetist, and a patient representative discussed the evidence in the context of benefits and harms, the certainty of the evidence, acceptability, feasibility, equity, cost, and use of resources, moderated by a GIN-certified master guideline developer and chair. We developed the recommendations in a consensus meeting, followed by a modified Delphi survey. RESULTS: The panel suggests either oral antibiotics alone prior to minimally invasive right colon resection or mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) plus oral antibiotics; MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive left colon and sigmoid resection, and prior to minimally invasive right colon resection when there is an intention to perform intracorporeal anastomosis; and MBP plus oral antibiotics plus enema prior to minimally invasive rectal surgery (conditional recommendations); and recommends MBP plus oral antibiotics prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery, when there is an intention to localize the lesion intraoperatively (strong recommendation). The full guideline with user-friendly decision aids is available in https://app.magicapp.org/#/guideline/LwvKej . CONCLUSION: This guideline provides recommendations on bowel preparation prior to minimally invasive colorectal surgery for different procedures, using highest methodological standards, through a structured framework informed by key stakeholders. Guideline registration number PREPARE-2023CN045.

Association of Preoperative High-Intensity Interval Training With Cardiorespiratory Fitness and Postoperative Outcomes Among Adults Undergoing Major Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Importance: Preoperative high-intensity interval training (HIIT) is associated with improved cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF) and may improve surgical outcomes. Objective: To summarize data from studies comparing the association of preoperative HIIT vs standard hospital care with preoperative CRF and postoperative outcomes. Data Sources: Data sources included Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Library, and Scopus databases with no language constraints, including abstracts and articles published before May 2023. Study Selection: The databases were searched for randomized clinical trials and prospective cohort studies with HIIT protocols in adult patients undergoing major surgery. Thirty-four of 589 screened studies met initial selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: A meta-analysis was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Data were extracted by multiple independent observers and pooled in a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in CRF, as measured by either peak oxygen consumption (V̇o2 peak) or 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) distance. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications; hospital length of stay (LOS); and changes in quality of life, anaerobic threshold, and peak power output. Results: Twelve eligible studies including 832 patients were identified. Pooled results indicated several positive associations for HIIT when compared with standard care either on CRF (V̇o2 peak, 6MWT, anaerobic threshold, or peak power output) or postoperative outcomes (complications, LOS, quality of life), although there was significant heterogeneity in study results. In 8 studies including 627 patients, there was moderate-quality evidence of significant improvement in V̇o2 peak (cumulative mean difference, 2.59 mL/kg/min; 95% CI, 1.52-3.65 mL/kg/min; P < .001). In 8 studies including 770 patients, there was moderate-quality evidence of a significant reduction in complications (odds ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.32-0.60; P < .001). There was no evidence that HIIT differed from standard care in hospital LOS (cumulative mean difference, -3.06 days; 95% CI, -6.41 to 0.29 days; P = .07). The analysis showed a high degree of heterogeneity in study outcomes and an overall low risk of bias. Conclusions and Relevance: The results of this meta-analysis suggest that preoperative HIIT may be beneficial for surgical populations through the improvement of exercise capacity and reduced postoperative complications. These findings support including HIIT in prehabilitation programs before major surgery. The high degree of heterogeneity in both exercise protocols and study results supports the need for further prospective, well-designed studies.

Has network meta-analysis resolved the controversies related to bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery?

AIM: There are discrepancies in the guidelines on preparation for colorectal surgery. While intravenous antibiotics (IV) are usually administered, the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and/or oral antibiotics (OA) is controversial. A recent network meta-analysis (NMA) demonstrated that the addition of OA reduced incisional surgical site infections (iSSIs) by more than 50%. We aimed to perform a NMA including only the highest quality randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in order to determine the ranking of different treatment strategies and assess these RCTs for methodological problems that may affect the conclusions of the NMAs. METHOD: A NMA was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. RCTs of adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery with appropriate antibiotic cover and with at least 250 participants recruited, clear definition of endpoints and duration of follow-up extending beyond discharge from hospital were included. The search included Medline, Embase, Cochrane and SCOPUS databases. Primary outcomes were iSSI and anastomotic leak (AL). Statistical analysis was performed in Stata v.15.1 using frequentist routines. RESULTS: Ten RCTs including 5107 patients were identified. Treatments compared IV (2218 patients), IV + OA (460 patients), MBP + IV (1405 patients), MBP + IV + OA (538 patients) and OA (486 patients). The likelihood of iSSI was significantly lower for IV + OA (rank 1) and MBP + IVA + OA (rank 2), reducing iSSIs by more than 50%. There were no differences between treatments for AL. Methodological issues included differences in definition, assessment and frequency of primary endpoint infections and the limited number of participants included in some treatment options. CONCLUSION: While this NMA supports the addition of OA to IV to reduce iSSI it also highlights unanswered questions and the need for well-designed pragmatic RCTs.

Effect of prucalopride to improve time to gut function recovery following elective colorectal surgery: randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Delayed return to gut function and prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) delay recovery after colorectal surgery. Prucalopride is a selective serotonin-4-receptor agonist that may improve gut motility. METHODS: This was a multicentre, double-blind, parallel, placebo-controlled randomized trial of 2 mg prucalopride versus placebo in patients undergoing elective colorectal resection. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease and planned ileostomy formation were excluded, but colostomy formation was allowed. The study medication was given 2 h before surgery and daily for up to 6 days after operation. The aim was to determine whether prucalopride improved return of gut function and reduced the incidence of PPOI. The primary endpoint was time to passage of stool and tolerance of diet (GI-2). Participants were allocated in a 1 : 1 ratio, in blocks of 10. Randomization was computer-generated. All study personnel, medical staff, and patients were blinded. RESULTS: This study was completed between October 2017 and May 2020 at two tertiary hospitals in New Zealand. A total of 148 patients were randomized, 74 per arm. Demographic data were similar in the two groups. There was no difference in median time to GI-2 between prucalopride and placebo groups: 3.5 (i.q.r. 2-5) versus 4 (3-5) days respectively (P = 0.124). Prucalopride improved the median time to passage of stool (3 versus 4 days; P = 0.027) but not time to tolerance of diet (2 versus 2 days; P = 0.669) or median duration of hospital stay (4 versus 4 days; P = 0.929). In patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery (125, 84.5 per cent), prucalopride improved median time to GI-2: 3 (2-4) days versus 4 (3-5) days for placebo (P = 0.012). The rate of PPOI, complications, and adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: Prucalopride did not improve time to overall recovery of gut function after elective colorectal surgery. Registration number: NCT02947269 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

The impact of prolonged delay to loop ileostomy closure on postoperative morbidity and hospital stay: A retrospective cohort study.

AIM: There is increasing evidence that delayed loop ileostomy closure is associated with an increase in postoperative morbidity. In the context of a publicly funded health service with constrained theatre access, we review the impact of delay in loop ileostomy closure. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure at the Dunedin Public Hospital between 2000-2017 was performed. Cases and complications were identified from the prospectively maintained Otago Clinical Audit database. Patient demographics, ASA score, indications for ileostomy, reasons for delay in closure, length of stay (LOS) after ileostomy closure and complications were collected. LOS and overall complication rate were assessed using univariable and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients were included in the study, of whom 74 (25.3%) were waiting for longer than 12 months for ileostomy closure. The overall complication rate was 21.5%. This was 8% up to 90 days, 20% between 90-360 days, 28% between 360-720 days and 54% after 720 days. Delay was associated with an increased risk of any complication (RR 1.06 for every 30 days with stoma, p < 0.001), including Ileus (OR [95% CI] 1.06 [1.00-1.11], p = 0.024). Overall mean LOS was 5.9 days (range 1-63), being 4.6 days up to 180 days, 5.6 between 180-720 days and 8.7 after 720 days. LOS significantly increased with increasing stoma duration (p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Increasing time with loop ileostomy is detrimental for patients, being associated with an increase in complication rates, and is detrimental for hospitals due to increased length of stay. Resources should be allocated for timely closure of loop ileostomies.

Short-term high-intensity interval training improves fitness before surgery: A randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: Improving cardiopulmonary reserve, or peak oxygen consumption( V ˙ O2peak ), may reduce postoperative complications; however, this may be difficult to achieve between diagnosis and surgery. Our primary aim was to assess the efficacy of an approximate 14-session, preoperative high-intensity interval training(HIIT) program to increase V ˙ O2peak by a clinically relevant 2 ml·kg-1 ·min-1 . Our secondary aim was to document clinical outcomes. METHODOLOGY: In this prospective study, participants aged 45-85 undergoing major abdominal surgery were randomized to standard care or 14 sessions of HIIT over 4 weeks. HIIT sessions involved approximately 30 min of stationary cycling. Interval training alternated 1 min of high (with the goal of reaching 90% max heart rate at least once during the session) and low/moderate-intensity cycling. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing(CPET) measured the change in V ˙ O2peak from baseline to surgery. Clinical outcomes included postoperative complications, length of stay(LOS), and Short Form 36 quality of life questionnaire(SF-36). RESULTS: Of 63 participants, 46 completed both CPETs and 50 completed clinical follow-up. There was a significant improvement in the HIIT group's mean ± SD V ˙ O2peak (HIIT 2.87 ± 1.94 ml·kg1 ·min-1 vs standard care 0.15 ± 1.93, with an overall difference of 2.73 ml·kg1 ·min-1 95%CI [1.53, 3.93] p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences between groups for clinical outcomes, although the observed differences consistently favored the exercise group. This was most notable for total number of complications (0.64 v 1.16 per patient, p = 0.07), SF-36 physical component score (p = 0.06), and LOS (mean 5.5 v 7.4 days, p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant improvement in V ˙ O2peak with a four-week preoperative HIIT program. Further appropriately powered work is required to explore the impact of preoperative HIIT on postoperative clinical outcomes.

Strategies for Antibiotic Administration for Bowel Preparation Among Patients Undergoing Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Network Meta-analysis.

Importance: There are discrepancies in guidelines on preparation for colorectal surgery. While intravenous (IV) antibiotics are usually administered, the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP), enemas, and/or oral antibiotics (OA) is controversial. Objective: To summarize all data from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that met selection criteria using network meta-analysis (NMA) to determine the ranking of different bowel preparation treatment strategies for their associations with postoperative outcomes. Data Sources: Data sources included MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases with no language constraints, including abstracts and articles published prior to 2021. Study Selection: Randomized studies of adults undergoing elective colorectal surgery with appropriate aerobic and anaerobic antibiotic cover that reported on incisional surgical site infection (SSI) or anastomotic leak were selected for inclusion in the analysis. These were selected by multiple reviewers and adjudicated by a separate lead investigator. A total of 167 of 6833 screened studies met initial selection criteria. Data Extraction and Synthesis: NMA was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Data were extracted by multiple independent observers and pooled in a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were incisional SSI and anastomotic leak. Secondary outcomes included other infections, mortality, ileus, and adverse effects of preparation. Results: A total of 35 RCTs that included 8377 patients were identified. Treatments compared IV antibiotics (2762 patients [33%]), IV antibiotics with enema (222 patients [3%]), IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (628 patients [7%]), MBP with IV antibiotics (2712 patients [32%]), MBP with IV antibiotics with OA (with good IV antibiotic cover in 925 patients [11%] and with good overall antibiotic cover in 375 patients [4%]), MBP with OA (267 patients [3%]), and OA (486 patients [6%]). The likelihood of incisional SSI was significantly lower for those receiving IV antibiotics with OA with or without enema (rank 1) and MBP with adequate IV antibiotics with OA (rank 2) compared with all other treatment options. The addition of OA to IV antibiotics, both with and without MBP, was associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. There were minimal differences between treatments in anastomotic leak and in any of the secondary outcomes. Conclusions and Relevance: This NMA demonstrated that the addition of OA to IV antibiotics were associated with a reduction in incisional SSI by greater than 50%. The results support the addition of OA to IV antibiotics to reduce incisional SSI among patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery.

Impact of Incisional Surgical Site Infections on Quality of Life and Patient Satisfaction after General Surgery: A Case Controlled Study.

Background: Most incisional surgical site infections (ISSI) are now diagnosed after discharge from hospital. In this context, it is important to document the impact ISSI has on our patients. Patients and Methods: Our surgical department sent a validated questionnaire to patients after they had been discharged. This documented incision problems, the 36-Item Short Form Health (SF-36) qualify of life questionnaire, and a patient satisfaction survey (PSS). We retrospectively reviewed records for 115 patients with an ISSI and 115 matched controls with no documented complications. Patient demographics and outcomes were collected. Differences in physical component summary (PCS) score and mental component summary (MCS) score and the PSS score were compared. Results: A majority (87%) of ISSIs were diagnosed after discharge from hospital. There were no differences in demographics, the American Society of Anaesthesiologists grade, or length of stay (LOS) between groups. Two months after surgery, ISSI was associated with lower post-operative SF-36 scores. The PCS was 42.9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 41.3-44.8) for ISSI cases and 47.0 (95% CI, 45.1-48.7) for controls (p ≤ 0.001). The MCS was 45.8 (95% CI, 43.7-47.9) and 50.2 (95% CI, 48.0-52.3), respectively (p = 0.01). Patients had less vitality, increased pain, and a reduction in physical activities and roles. The PSS score was 82.5 (95% CI, 79.6-85.4) in the control group and 74.1 (95% CI, 71.1-77.0) in the ISSI group (p < 0.001). Patients with ISSI reported worse satisfaction ratings with the quality of information received (p = 0.005) and their satisfaction with surgery (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Incisional surgical site infection was correlated with lower quality of life and PSS scores for up to two months after surgery. Prospective studies with pre-operative and post-operative quality of life are required to confirm causality.

Role for colorectal teams to support non-colorectal teams to improve clinical outcomes and adherence to ERAS guidelines for segmental colectomy: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To identify whether compliance with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society recommendations is associated with length of stay (LOS) in a New Zealand hospital for patients undergoing segmental colectomy in mixed acute and elective general surgery wards. METHODS: Consecutive elective colorectal surgeries (n = 770) between October 2012 and February 2019 were audited. Patients with non-segmental colectomies, multi-organ surgeries, LOS > 14 days, and those who died were excluded. Logistic regression was used to determine the relationship between patient demographics, compliance with ERAS guidelines, and suboptimal LOS (> 4 days). RESULTS: Analysis included 376 patients. Age, surgery prior to 2014, surgical approach, non-colorectal surgical team, operation type, and complications were significantly associated with suboptimal LOS. Non-compliance with ERAS recommendations for laparoscopy [OR 8.9, 95% CI (4.52, 19.67)], removal of indwelling catheters (IDC) [OR 3.14, 95% CI (1.85, 5.51)], use of abdominal drains [OR 4.27, 95% CI (0.99, 18.35)], and removal of PCA [OR 8.71, 95% CI (1.78, 157.27)], were associated with suboptimal LOS (univariable analysis). Multivariable analysis showed that age, surgical team, late removal of IDC, and open approach were independent predictors of suboptimal LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Non-compliance with ERAS guidelines for laparoscopic approach and early removal of IDC was higher among procedures performed by non-colorectal surgery teams, and was also associated with adverse postoperative events and suboptimal LOS. This study demonstrates the importance of the surgical team's expertise in affecting surgical outcomes, and did not find significant independent associations between most individual ERAS guidelines and suboptimal LOS once adjusting for other factors.

Loop ileostomy closure: a retrospective comparison of three techniques.

BACKGROUND: Loop ileostomy (LI) formation is a common practice for patients undergoing low anterior resection or restorative ileo-anal pouch surgery. Ileostomy closure can be performed using a stapled or hand-sewn technique, with or without resection. If hand-sewn, the closure can be one or two layers. Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated one technique to be superior, and meta-analyses are limited by the heterogeneity of published studies. Our primary aim is to compare stapled ileostomy closure with single- and two-layer hand-sewn closures. METHODS: This retrospective, single-centre cohort study included patients undergoing LI closure between January 1999 and April 2016. Patient demographics, anastomotic technique, operative time and patient outcomes were collected. RESULTS: Our analysis included 244 patients (median age 67 years, 43.4% female). There were no significant differences in mean operative times (71.5, 73.1 and 88.5 min, for stapled, single- and two-layer hand-sewn closures, respectively, adjusted overall P = 0.262), or morbidity (21.5% versus 20.4% versus 17.6%, adjusted overall P = 0.934) between stapled or hand-sewn anastomoses, and no mortality. Once adjusting for age, sex, American College of Anaesthesiology grade, and consultant surgeon, the length of stay was different (overall P = 0.034), being similar between stapled and single-layer closures (4.2 versus 5.5 days, P = 0.105), but significantly different between stapled and two-layer closures (4.2 versus 8.3 days, P = 0.026). CONCLUSION: Stapled and single-layered hand-sewn closures are similar in length of procedure, length of stay and complication rates. A two-layer, hand-sewn technique is associated with a significant increase in stay compared to a stapled ileostomy closure.

Patient reporting of complications after surgery: what impact does documenting postoperative problems from the perspective of the patient using telephone interview and postal questionnaires have on the identification of complications after surgery?

OBJECTIVES: To identify the frequency of postoperative complications, including problems identified by patients and complications occurring after discharge from hospital. To identify how these impact on quality of life (QoL) and the patient's perception of the success of their treatment. DESIGN: Data from three prospective sources: surgical audit, a telephone interview (2 weeks after discharge) and a patient-focused questionnaire (2 months after surgery) were retrospectively analysed. SETTING: Dunedin Hospital, Dunedin, New Zealand. PARTICIPANTS: Of the 500 patients, 100 undergoing each of the following types of surgeries: anorectal, biliary, colorectal, hernia and skin. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were complications and the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36). Secondary outcomes included the patient's ratings of their treatment and a questionnaire-derived patient satisfaction score. RESULTS: 226 patients reported a complication; there were 344 separate complications and 411 reports of complications (16% of complications were reported on more than one occasion). The audit, telephone interview and questionnaire captured 12.6%, 36.3% and 51% of the 411 reports, respectively. Patients with complications had a lower SF-36 Physical Composite Summary (PCS) score (48.5 vs 43.9, p=0.021) and a lower Patient Satisfaction Score (85.6 vs 74.6, p<0.001). Rating of information received, care received, symptoms experienced, QoL and satisfaction with surgery were all significantly worse for patients with complications. On linear regression analysis, surgical complications, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score and age all made a similar contribution to the SF-36 PCS score, with standardised beta coefficients between 0.19 and 0.21. CONCLUSIONS: Following surgery, over 40% of patients experienced complications. The QoL and satisfaction score were significantly less than for those without complications. The majority of complications were diagnosed after discharge from hospital. Taking more notice of the patient perspective helps us to identify problems, to understand what is important to them and may suggest ways to improve perioperative care.

How much force is required to perforate a colon during colonoscopy? An experimental study.

INTRODUCTION: Colonoscopy is a commonly-performed procedure to diagnose pathology of the large intestine. Perforation of the colon is a rare but feared complication. It is currently unclear how much force is actually required to cause such injury nor how this is altered in certain diseases. Our aim was to analyze the forces required to perforate the colon in experiments using porcine tissues. METHODS: Using 3D printing technology, models of two commercially available colonoscope heads were printed under three configurations: straight (I), 90°- bent (L) and fully bent (U). Samples of porcine colon were assessed with the models and configurations under perpendicular and angular load application and these data compared to the maximum force typically exerted by experienced colonoscopists. RESULTS: The force required for perforation was significantly lower for the I compared to the L of the larger colonoscope head configuration under angular loading (14.1 vs. 46.5 N). Similar differences were found for linear stiffness when loaded (I vs. L small when loaded perpendicular: 0.8 vs. 2.4 N/mm, I vs. L large when loaded angled 0.7 vs. 2.1 N/mm). The mode and site of failure varied significantly between the scopes, with delamination of the mucosa/submucosa below the sample (96%) for the I, blunt mucosa/submucosa/muscularis failure adjacent to the loading site (77%) for the L, and failure of all colon layers lateral to the loading site (59%) for the U configuration, respectively. Perpendicular and angulated loading resulted in similar load-deformation values. Maximum forces typically exerted by colonoscopists averaged 13.9-27.9 N, depending on the colonoscope model and head configuration. DISCUSSION: The force required for colon perforation varies depending on the type mode of loading and is likely lower than the force an experienced colonoscopist would exert in daily practice. There is a real risk of perforation, especially when the end of the scope is advancing directly into the colonic wall. The given experimental setup allowed to obtain reliable data of the colon in a standardized scenario, forming the basis for further experiments.

Protocol, and practical challenges, for a randomised controlled trial comparing the impact of high intensity interval training against standard care before major abdominal surgery: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Risk factors, such as the number of pre-existing co-morbidities, the extent of the underlying pathology and the magnitude of the required operation, cannot be changed before surgery. It may, however, be possible to improve the cardiopulmonary fitness of the patient with an individualised exercise program. We are performing a randomised controlled trial (RCT) assessing the impact of High Intensity Interval Training (HIIT) on preoperative cardiopulmonary fitness and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Consecutive eligible patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery are being randomised to HIIT or standard care in a 1:1 ratio. Participants allocated to HIIT will perform 14 exercise sessions on a stationary cycle ergometer, over a period of 4-6 weeks before surgery. The sessions, which are individualised, aim to start with ten repeated 1-min blocks of intense exercise with a target of reaching a heart rate exceeding 90% of the age predicted maximum, followed by 1 min of lower intensity cycling. As endurance improves, the duration of exercise is increased to achieve five 2-min intervals of high intensity exercise followed by 2 min of lower intensity cycling. Each training session lasts approximately 30 min. The primary endpoint, change in peak oxygen consumption (Peak VO2) measured during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, is assessed at baseline and before surgery. Secondary endpoints include postoperative complications, length of hospital stay and three clinically validated scores: the surgical recovery scale; the postoperative morbidity survey; and the SF-36 quality of life score. The standard deviation for changes in Peak VO2 will be assessed after the first 30 patients and will be used to calculate the required sample size. DISCUSSION: We want to assess if 14 sessions of HIIT is sufficient to improve Peak VO2 by 2 mL/kg/min in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery and to explore the best clinical endpoint for a subsequent RCT designed to assess if improving Peak VO2 will translate into improving clinical outcomes after surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617000587303 . Registered on 26 April 2017.

Accuracy of the Surgeons' Clinical Prediction of Postoperative Major Complications Using a Visual Analog Scale.

BACKGROUND: Although the risk factors that contribute to postoperative complications are well recognized, prediction in the context of a particular patient is more difficult. We were interested in using a visual analog scale (VAS) to capture surgeons' prediction of the risk of a major complication and to examine whether this could be improved. METHODS: The study was performed in 3 stages. In phase I, the surgeon assessed the risk of a major complication on a 100-mm VAS immediately before and after surgery. A quality control questionnaire was designed to check if the VAS was being scored as a linear scale. In phase II, a VAS with 6 subscales for different areas of clinical risk was introduced. In phase III, predictions were completed following the presentation of detailed feedback on the accuracy of prediction of complications. RESULTS: In total, 1295 predictions were made by 58 surgeons in 859 patients. Eight surgeons did not use a linear scale (6 logarithmic, 2 used 4 categories of risk). Surgeons made a meaningful prediction of major complications (preoperative median score 40 mm for complications v. 22 mm for no complication, P < 0.001; postoperative 46 mm v. 21 mm, P < 0.001). In phase I, the discrimination of prediction for preoperative (0.778), postoperative (0.810), and POSSUM (Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality and Morbidity) morbidity (0.750) prediction was similar. Although there was no improvement in prediction with a multidimensional VAS, there was a significant improvement in the discrimination of prediction after feedback (preoperative, 0.895; postoperative, 0.918). CONCLUSION: Awareness of different ways a VAS is scored is important when designing and interpreting studies. Clinical assessment of major complications by the surgeon was initially comparable to the prediction of the POSSUM morbidity score and improved significantly following the presentation of clinically relevant feedback.

Incidence and significance of postoperative complications occurring between discharge and 30 days: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate documentation of complications is fundamental to clinical audit and research. While it is established that accurate diagnosis of surgical site infection (SSI) requires follow-up for 30 days; for other complications, there are minimal data quantifying their importance between discharge and 30 days. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, inpatients undergoing general or vascular surgery were reviewed daily for complications by the medical team and a research fellow. A standardized telephone questionnaire was performed 30 days following surgery. All complications were documented and classified according to severity. RESULTS: A total of 237 of 388 patients who completed the telephone survey developed a complication, including 77 who developed a complication for the first time after discharge from hospital. Overall 135 (33%) of a total of 405 complications were identified after discharge. These complications included 36 of 63 (57%) SSI, 6 of 12 small bowel obstructions, and three of four major thromboembolic events and a number of space SSI, urinary infections, functional gastrointestinal problems, and pain management problems. Cardiac, respiratory, and neurologic complications were mainly diagnosed in hospital. Of the 135 "postdischarge" complications, 89 were managed in the community and 46 (34%) resulted in admission to hospital, including seven which required a major intervention. There was one death. CONCLUSIONS: One-third of complications occurred after discharge, and one-third of these resulted in readmission to hospital. Research and audit based on inpatient data alone significantly underestimates morbidity rates. Discharge planning should include contingency plans for managing problems commonly diagnosed after discharge form hospital.

Duodenal obstruction associated with an abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Aortoduodenal syndrome is a rare clinical entity characterized by an upper gastrointestinal obstruction in association with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. The exact mechanism of obstruction is unknown. We present a case of aortoduodenal syndrome and discuss the interplay of the aneurysm and duodenum in the development of the duodenal obstruction.