The impact of obesity on postoperative outcomes following surgery for colorectal cancer: analysis of the National Inpatient Sample 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: The global burden of obesity has reached epidemic proportions, placing great strain on the North American healthcare system. We designed a retrospective cohort database study comparing postoperative morbidity and healthcare resource utilization between patients living with and without obesity undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer were identified from the 2015 to 2019 National Inpatient Sample database. Patients were stratified according to obesity status (i.e., body mass index of 30 kg/m2). Propensity score matching (PSM) with 1:1 nearest-neighbour matching was performed according to demographic, operative, and hospital characteristics. The primary outcome was postoperative morbidity. Secondary outcomes included system-specific postoperative complications, postoperative mortality, length of stay, total admission healthcare cost, and post-discharge disposition. McNemar's and Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank tests were performed. RESULTS: After PSM, 7565 non-obese and 7565 obese patients were included. Patients with obesity had a 10% increase in relative risk of overall in-hospital postoperative morbidity (23.1% versus 25.6%, P = 0.0015) and a $4564 increase in hospitalization cost ($70 248 USD versus $74 812 USD, P = 0.0004). Patients with obesity were more likely to require post-operative ICU admission (5.0% versus 8.0%, P < 0.0001) and less likely to be discharged home after their index operation (68.3% versus 64.2%, P = 0.0022). CONCLUSION: Patients with obesity undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer may be at an increased risk of in-hospital postoperative morbidity. They may also be more likely to have increased hospitalization costs, post-operative ICU admissions, and to not be discharged directly home. Preoperative optimization via weight loss strategies should be further explored.

Assessing the Modified Frailty Index and Post-Operative Outcomes in Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Studies identifying predictors of postoperative outcomes in adhesive small bowel obstruction are limited. This study investigates the efficacy of the modified frailty index (mFI)to predict postoperative morbidity and mortality among patients undergoing surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction. METHODS: A multicentre retrospective cohort study including patients undergoing surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction after failed trial of nonoperative management between January 2015 and December 2020 was performed. Impact of frailty status using the mFI, stratified as frail (≥0.27) and robust (<0.27), on postoperative morbidity, mortality, length of stay, and discharge destination was evaluated using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Ninety-two robust patients (mean age 62.4 y, 68% female) and 41 frail patients (mean age 81.7 y, 63% female) were included. On simple stratification, frail patients had significantly increased 30-d morbidity (overall morbidity 80% versus 49%) and need for higher level of care on discharge (41% versus 9%). However, on multiple regression, functional dependence but not the mFI, was independently associated with worse 30-d overall morbidity (odds ratio [OR] 3.97, confidence interval [CI] 1.29-12.19) and lower likelihood of returning to preoperative disposition (OR 0.21, CI 0.05-0.91). The delay in operation beyond 5 d was independently associated with worse 30-d outcomes including overall morbidity and mortality (OR 7.54, CI 2.13-26.73) and decreased return to preoperative disposition (OR 0.14, CI 0.04-0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The mFI, although promising, was not independently predictive of outcomes following surgery for adhesive small bowel obstruction. Further adequately powered studies are required.

Modified frailty index predicts postoperative morbidity in adhesive small bowel obstruction: analyzing the National Inpatient Sample 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data identifying predictors of postoperative outcomes in adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO). This study used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess the efficacy of the modified frailty index (mFI) to predict postoperative morbidity among patients undergoing an operation for ASBO. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the NIS between September 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, was performed to identify adult patients who underwent nonelective operative intervention for ASBO. The mFI was used to stratify patients as either frail (mFI value ≥ 0.27) or robust (mFI value < 0.27). The primary outcomes were overall in-hospital postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were system-specific morbidity, length of stay (LOS), total in-hospital healthcare cost, and discharge disposition. Univariable and multivariable regressions were used. RESULTS: Overall, 23251 robust patients and 6122 frail patients were included. Adjusted analyses demonstrated that frail patients had increased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.16; 95% CI, 1.80-2.60), postoperative morbidity (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.52-1.74), postoperative LOS (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 0.97 days; 95% CI, 0.73-1.21), and total in-hospital healthcare costs (aMD, $18,921; 95% CI, $14,608-$23,235) and were less likely to be discharged home (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.55-0.63). The findings were unchanged on subgroup analysis of patients undergoing open operation and those older than 65 years of age. CONCLUSION: The mFI may predict postoperative outcomes for ASBO. Stratifying patients based on frailty may assist clinicians and patients in making informed decisions, setting realistic expectations, and proactively planning postoperative disposition.

Prucalopride and Bowel Function Post Gastrointestinal Surgery: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) contributes to morbidity and prolonged hospitalization. Prucalopride, a selective 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor agonist, may enhance bowel motility. This review assesses whether the perioperative use of prucalopride compared to placebo is associated with accelerated return of bowel function post gastrointestinal (GI) surgery. METHODS: OVID, CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched as of January 2024 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing prucalopride and placebo for prevention of PPOI in adult patients undergoing GI surgery. The primary outcomes were time to stool, time to flatus, and time to oral tolerance. The secondary outcomes were incidence of PPOI, length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, adverse events, and overall costs. The Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized trials and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations framework were used. An inverse variance random effects model was used. RESULTS: From 174 citations, 3 RCTs with 139 patients in each treatment group were included. Patients underwent a variety of GI surgeries. Patients treated with prucalopride had a decreased time to stool (mean difference 36.82 hours, 95% CI 59.4 to 14.24 hours lower, I2 = 62%, low certainty evidence). Other outcomes were not statistically significantly different (very low certainty evidence). Postoperative complications and adverse events could not be meta-analyzed due to heterogeneity; yet individual studies suggested no significant differences (very low certainty evidence). DISCUSSION: Current RCT evidence suggests that prucalopride may enhance postoperative return of bowel function. Larger RCTs assessing patient important outcomes and associated costs are needed before routine use of this agent.

Postoperative Gastrointestinal Dysfunction After Neuromuscular Blockade Reversal With Sugammadex Versus Cholinesterase Inhibitors in Patients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction (POGD) commonly occurs following gastrointestinal (GI) surgery and is associated with specific anesthetic agents. Cholinesterase inhibitors employed for reversing neuromuscular blockade have been implicated in development of POGD. Sugammadex, a novel reversal agent, is linked with reduced POGD. However, there is a lack of comprehensive comparative review between these agents regarding their impact on POGD following GI surgery. This study aims to systematically review the effects of sugammadex on POGD compared to cholinesterase inhibitors following GI surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched as of July 2022 to identify articles comparing sugammadex with cholinesterase inhibitors in patients undergoing gastrointestinal surgery, specifically in relation to POGD. Secondary endpoints included length of hospital stay, readmission rates, pulmonary complications, and postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: From 198 citations, 2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 3 retrospective cohorts with 717 patients receiving sugammadex and 812 patients receiving cholinesterase inhibitors were included. Significantly lower rates of prolonged postoperative ileus (OR .44, 95% CI .25-.77, P < .05, I2 = 56%, low certainty evidence) was observed with sugammadex. No significant difference in any other outcome was observed. Narrative review of readmission data demonstrated no significant difference. CONCLUSION: The use of sugammadex following gastrointestinal surgery is associated with significantly lower rates of prolonged postoperative ileus compared to cholinesterase inhibitors. However, these do not translate into a significant reduction in length of stay, morbidity, or postoperative nausea and vomiting. Results are limited by the numer of studies included and missing data, more robust RCTs are needed before recommendations can be made.

The impact of operative approach for obese colorectal cancer patients: analysis of the National Inpatient Sample 2015-2019.

AIM: Obesity is a well-established risk factor for the development of colorectal cancer. As such, patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer have increasingly higher body mass indices (BMIs). The advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques in recent years have helped surgeons circumvent some of the challenges associated with operating in the setting of obesity. While previous studies suggest that laparoscopy improves outcomes compared with open surgery in obese patients, this has never been established at the population level. Therefore, we designed a retrospective database study using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) with the aim of comparing laparoscopic with open approaches for obese patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of the NIS from 2015 to 2019 was conducted including patients with a BMI of greater than 30 kg/m2 undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. The primary outcomes were postoperative in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative system-specific complications, total admission healthcare cost and length of stay (LOS). Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were utilized to compare the two operative approaches. RESULTS: A total of 4742 patients underwent open surgery and 3231 underwent laparoscopic surgery. We observed a significant decrease in overall postoperative morbidity [17.5% vs. 31.4%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.64; p < 0.001], gastrointestinal morbidity (8.1% vs. 14.5%, aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.50-0.69; p < 0.001) and genitourinary morbidity (10.1% vs. 18.6%, aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52-0.70; p < 0.001) with the use of laparoscopy. Postoperative LOS was 1.7 days shorter (95% CI 1.5-2.0, p < 0.001) and cost of admission was decreased by $9106 (95% CI $4638-$13 573, p < 0.001) with laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery for obese patients with colorectal cancer is associated with significantly decreased postoperative morbidity and improved healthcare resource utilization compared with open surgery. Laparoscopic approaches should be relied upon whenever feasible for these patients.

A systematic review of postoperative outcomes of kidney stone surgery and meta-analysis of outcomes of percutaneous nephrolithotomy in individuals with spinal cord injury.

STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate outcomes of surgical treatment for nephrolithiasis in individuals with spinal cord injury (SCI). METHODS: We systematically reviewed the Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, and Web of Science databases for studies examining outcomes of kidney stone procedures in individuals with SCI. Our primary outcomes were stone-free rate (SFR) and complications as categorized by Clavien-Dindo classification. A meta-analysis of comparative studies was performed to assess differences in SFR and complication rate between individuals with and without SCI following PCNL. RESULTS: A total of 27 retrospective and observational articles were included. Interventions for kidney stones included PCNL, shockwave lithotripsy (SWL), and ureteroscopy. Pooled SFR in individuals with SCI was 54%, for SWL, 74% for PCNL, and 36% for ureteroscopy. Meta-analyses found that there was higher rate of grades I (OR 9.54; 95% CI, 3.06 to 29.79), II (OR 3.38; 95% CI, 1.85 to 6.18), and III-V (OR 2.38; 95% CI, 1.35 to 4.19) complications in individuals with SCI compared to non-SCI individuals following PCNL. The rate of infectious complications was also higher in individuals with SCI (OR 6.15; 95% CI, 1.86 to 20.39). However, there was no difference in SFR (OR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.15 to 2.64) between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Individuals with SCI are at higher risk of minor, major, and infectious complications following PCNL compared to non-SCI individuals. There was no significant difference between groups in SFR following PCNL, suggesting that PCNL is an effective surgery for kidney stones in individuals with SCI.

A few panel members dominated guideline development meeting discussions: Social network analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To identify patterns of interactions that may influence guideline panels' decision-making. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Social network analysis (SNA) to describe the conversation network in a guideline development meeting in United States. RESULTS: We analyzed one two-day guideline panel meeting that included 20 members who developed a guideline using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. The conversation pattern of the guideline panel indicated a well-connected network (density=0.59, clustering coefficient=0.82). GRADE topics on quality of evidence and benefits versus harms accounted for 46%; non-GRADE factors accounted for 30% of discussion. The chair, co-chair and methodologist initiated 53% and received 60% of all communications in the meeting; 42% of their communications occurred among themselves. SNA metrics (eigenvector, betweenness and closeness) indicated that these individuals also exerted highest influence on discussion, controlled information flow and were at the center of all communications. Members were more likely to continue previous discussion with the same individuals after both morning breaks (r=0.54, P<0.005; r=0.17, P=0.04), and after the last break on day 2 (r=0.44, P=0.015). CONCLUSION: Non-GRADE factors such as breaks, and the members' roles, affect guideline development more than previously recognized. Collectively, the chair, co-chair and methodologist dominated the discussion.

Concurrent use of statins and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Statins are used primarily in patients with cardiovascular disease. More recently, they have demonstrated benefit in oncology patients. In vitro models have shown decreased rectal tumor cell viability in cells receiving chemoradiation and statin therapy. In vivo models have been less clear. This study aims to elucidate the impact of concurrent use of statins on the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer. METHODS: Search of Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL was performed. Articles were included if they reported complete pathological response (pCR), long-term oncologic outcomes, or chemoradiotherapy-induced toxicity in patients with rectal cancer receiving concurrent statin and neoadjuvant therapy. A pairwise meta-analyses was performed using inverse variance random effects. RESULTS: From 1564 citations, six studies with 726 patients on statin therapy (24.5% female, age: 63.6 years) and 1863 patients not on statin therapy (35.6% female, age: 60.9 years) were included. There was no significant difference in pCR rate between patients on statin therapy and patients not on statin therapy (RR 1.23, 95%CI 0.98-1.54, p = 0.08). Similarly, no difference existed between groups in long-term oncologic outcomes (5-year overall survival: RR 1.03, 95%CI 0.86-1.24, p = 0.75; 5-year disease-free survival: RR 1.04, 95%CI 0.85-1.26, p = 0.73). Chemoradiotherapy-induced toxicities were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: The concurrent use of statin and neoadjuvant therapy did not significantly impact short- or long-term oncologic outcomes in patients with rectal cancer. Yet, despite pooling of data, this study remained inadequately powered. Larger, prospective studies are required to further elucidate the impact of statins on patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.

Radiotherapy alone versus chemoradiotherapy for stage I anal squamous cell carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Patients with stage I anal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) have been underrepresented in landmark trials showing superiority of chemoradiotherapy over radiotherapy for definitive treatment. This review aims to elucidate whether definitive treatment with radiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy is associated with differences in survival and treatment-related toxicity outcomes in patients with stage I anal SCC. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched as of November 2020 to identify studies comparing outcomes of radiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy for non-operative treatment of patients with stage I anal SCC. The primary outcomes were 5-year overall survival and 5-year disease-free survival. The secondary outcome was treatment-related toxicities. A pairwise meta-analysis was performed using an inverse-variance random-effects model. RESULTS: From 2174 citations, 5 retrospective studies with 415 patients treated with radiotherapy and 3784 patients treated with chemoradiotherapy were included. Patients treated with chemoradiotherapy had an increased 5-year overall survival (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.26, p < 0.00001, I2 = 0%) but no significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.92-1.11, p = 0.87, I2 = 0%). Treatment-related toxicities could not be meta-analyzed due to heterogeneity. Limited data from individual studies suggested an increased frequency of select toxicities with chemoradiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy may be an appropriate alternative to chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage I anal SCC who may be unable to tolerate chemotherapy-related toxicity; however, chemoradiotherapy remains the gold standard. Larger prospective studies comparing strategies for this select patient population are needed to clarify whether treatment can be de-escalated.