Examining emergency department utilization in the post-foregut surgery patient.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine emergency department (ED) utilization following minimally invasive foregut surgery and determine its impact on costs. Furthermore, we sought to determine their relationship to the index procedure, whether they are preventable, and describe strategies for decreasing unnecessary ED visits. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted for all patients undergoing foregut procedures from January 2018 through June 2019. ED utilization was examined from 0 to 90 days. The proportion of visits related to surgery, preventable visits, and median ED costs were compared between visits occurring 0-30 days (early) versus 31-90 days (delayed) postoperatively as well as occurring from 8 am to 5 pm versus 5 pm to 8 am. RESULTS: Of 458 patients who underwent foregut surgery, 72.5% were female and the mean age was 60 years old. 92 patients (20%) presented to the ED within 90 days. Of these, 59 patients (64.1%) presented to the ED early versus 33 patients (35.9%) delayed. 56.5% of ED visits occurred during clinic hours. 56 (60.9%) ED visits were related to the procedure and 20 (35.7%) were preventable. The median ED return cost was $970. Early ED visits were significantly more likely to be related to surgery (72.9% vs 39.4%, p = 0.0016). There was no significant difference in the proportion of visits that were preventable (32.6% vs 46.2%, p = 0.3755) and ED return cost did not vary significantly ($995 vs $965, p = 0.43) between early and delayed visits. CONCLUSIONS: ED visits are common after foregut surgery and represent a financial burden on healthcare. Most visits occur early and are more likely to be related to surgery. Importantly, more than one-third of ED visits related to surgery were preventable and most occurred during clinic hours on weekdays. Providers should consider implementation of strategies to improve outpatient utilization and decrease unnecessary ED visits.

A 3-Year MBSAQIP propensity-matched analysis of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with concomitant cholecystectomy: Is the robotic or laparoscopic approach preferred?

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to compare outcomes of patients undergoing minimally invasive RYGB (MIS/RYGB) versus MIS/RYGB with concomitant Cholecystectomy (CCY). A secondary objective was to compare the outcomes for laparoscopic RYGB (LRYGB) and robotic RYGB (RRYGB) with concomitant CCY. METHODS: Outcomes of 117,939 MIS/RYGB with and without CCY were propensity-matched (Age, Gender, BMI, Comorbidities), 10:1, using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) database from 2015-2017. The MIS/RYGB with CCY were then separated into LRYGB and RRYGB cases for comparison. Exclusion criteria included emergency cases, conversions to open, and age less than 18. RESULTS: The operative time and length of stay (LOS) was significantly increased with addition of concomitant CCY. There was no significant difference in readmission, reoperation, intervention, morbidity, or mortality. The RRYGB with CCY approach was associated with a significantly longer operative times compared to the LRYGB with CCY (177 vs. 135 min, p < 0.0001). The laparoscopic and robotic groups demonstrated no significant difference LOS, readmission, reoperation, intervention, morbidity, or mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that concomitant cholecystectomy increased the operative time and length of stay. However, concomitant CCY was not associated with any increased morbidity. The study demonstrated no significant difference in morbidity between robotic and laparoscopic approach. The robotic approach, however, was associated with a significantly longer operative time compared to the laparoscopic approach. While the indications for CCY remain controversial, concomitant CCY does not convey additional risk regardless of operative approach.

Emergency department overutilization following cholecystectomy and inguinal hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Emergency Department (ED) utilization following general surgery procedures is poorly understood and places immense strain on the healthcare system. Inefficient ED utilization is responsible for up to $38 billion in wasteful spending annually. Nearly 56% of ED visits may be avoidable. The aim of our study was to quantify ED utilization following elective cholecystectomy (CCY) and inguinal hernia repair (IHR), to characterize the impact and identify causes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients across eight hospitals in a single health system undergoing elective CCY and IHR between January 2018 to June 2019. Patients who returned to the ED within 30 and 90 days were analyzed for hospital readmission, preventability (based on the Goldfield criteria), relation to index surgery and clinician communication within 48 h of presentation. RESULTS: In total, 3678 patients had elective surgery in this timeframe. Of these, 476 patients (13.1%) visited the ED at least once within 90 days from their surgical admission discharge date and 114 were readmitted to the hospital (23.9%). Average length from discharge to ED presentation was 27.1 days. The mean cost associated with these ED visits was $974 per visit. 31.9% communicated with their clinician within 48 h of ED presentation. 73.9% of ED visits occurred between Monday - Friday and 51.5% took place between the hours of 8 am-5 pm. 46.6% of ED visits were related to the index operation and 40.7% of ED visits were deemed preventable. CONCLUSIONS: While hospital readmissions have been scrutinized in the literature, relatively little is known about postoperative ED utilization. Our study is one of the first to document postoperative ED utilization up to 90 days after surgery. For just two common elective general surgery procedures, we found these visits were financially burdensome and led to ED discharge in > 75% of patients. Numerous opportunities to improve care were identified. Most ED visits occurred on weekdays and during daylight hours, suggesting an opportunity to utilize outpatient clinics in lieu of the ED. Nearly 50% were related to the operation and nearly 40% were preventable. Revamping the discharge instructions and post-discharge communication-including novel strategies leveraging telemedicine-by providers has the potential to dramatically decrease postoperative ED utilization.

Robot-assisted minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy is superior to the laparoscopic technique.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy (LDP) reduces postoperative morbidity, hospital stay, and recovery as compared with open distal pancreatectomy. Technical limitations of laparoscopic surgery may limit patient eligibility and require conversion to open or hand-assisted surgery to maintain patient safety. We hypothesized that robot-assisted distal pancreatectomy (RADP) was superior to LDP as a result of improved surgical manipulation and visualization, potentially expanding the indications for minimally invasive pancreatectomy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all minimally invasive distal pancreatectomies at University of Pittsburgh Medical Center between January 2004 and February 2011. We compared the perioperative outcomes, 90-day morbidity and mortality of our first 30 RADPs to 94 consecutive historical control LDPs. RESULTS: Patients undergoing RADP and LDP demonstrated equivalent age, sex, race, American Society of Anesthesiologists' score, and tumor size. Postoperative length of hospital stay and rates of pancreatic fistula, blood transfusion, and readmission were not statistically different. Patients in the RADP group did not require conversion to open surgery unlike the LDP group (16%, P < 0.05) and had reduced risk of excessive blood loss. There were more pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas approached robotically (43%) than laparoscopically (15%) (P < 0.05). Oncological outcomes in these cases were superior for the robotic-assisted group with higher rates of margin negative resection and improved lymph node yield for both benign and malignant lesions (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: RADPs were equivalent to LDPs in nearly all measures of outcome and safety but significantly reduced the risk of conversion to open resection, despite a statistically greater probability of malignancy in the robotic cohort. We concluded that robotic assistance may broaden indications for minimally invasive pancreatectomy.

Impact of Urinary Catheterization on Postoperative Outcomes After Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass Surgery in Propensity-Matched Cohorts.

BACKGROUND: The impact of urinary catheter avoidance in bariatric enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols is yet to be established. The purpose of the current study is to determine whether urinary catheter use in patients undergoing Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) procedures has an effect on postoperative outcomes. METHODS: An institutional database was utilized to identify adult patients undergoing primary minimally invasive RYGB surgery. Outcomes included incidence of urinary tract infection (UTI) within 30 days postoperatively, 30-day readmission rates, proportion of patients discharged after postoperative day 1 (delayed discharge), length of stay (LOS), and operating room time. These were compared between propensity-matched groups with and without urinary catheter placement. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in postoperative UTI's (2.2% for both cohorts, P = .593) or 30-day readmission rates for patients with and without urinary catheters (6.6% and 4.4%, respectively, P = .260). Mean LOS (1.7 vs. 1.5 days, P = .001) and the proportion of patients having a delayed discharge (47.3% vs. 33.7%, P = .001) was greater in patients with a catheter. Operating room time was longer in the urinary catheter group (221.8 vs. 207.9 minutes, P = .002). DISCUSSION: Avoidance of indwelling urinary catheters in RYGB surgical patients decreased delayed discharges and LOS without affecting readmission or reoperation rates. Therefore, we recommend that avoidance of urinary catheters in routine RYGB surgery be considered for inclusion into standardized ERAS protocols. Urinary catheters should continue to be utilized in select cases, however, as these were not shown to affect rate of UTIs.

Is there a role for bariatric surgery in patients with severe obesity and type 1 diabetes?

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of obesity in type 1 diabetes has been increasing over the past decades. Multiple studies have demonstrated suboptimal outcomes with dietary control and medical management for obesity and type 2 diabetes. This study's objective was to evaluate insulin and diabetic medication requirements in patients with type 1 diabetes 2 years after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This was a retrospective medical-record review study from 2002 to 2019 at Geisinger Health System. Of 4549 total bariatric surgeries, 38 bariatric surgery patients were confirmed to have type 1 diabetes. Type 1 diabetes was confirmed by medical-record review and/or the presence of C-peptide <5 ng/mL. RESULTS: The patient cohort had a mean age of 41 years, with 87% being female. The mean body mass index was 43.0 kg/m2, with a mean HbA1C of 8.4% before surgery. During follow-up, the insulin requirements improved from 114 units preoperatively to 60 units at 1 year postoperatively (SD = 54.5, P = .0018) and 60 units at 2 years postoperatively (SD = 60.3, P = .0033). Though not significant, the number of patients on more than 1 diabetic medication decreased from 66% preoperatively to 53% 1 year postoperatively (P = .343) and 52% at 2 years (P = .149). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated significant improvement in the insulin and total number of diabetic medication requirements after bariatric surgery, suggesting that bariatric surgery may be a viable treatment for patients with type 1 diabetes.

Stratified Preoperative A1c is not Significantly Associated With Clavien-Dindo Major Complications Following Bariatric Surgery in the MBSAQIP Database.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is highly prevalent comorbidity in patients with morbid obesity. It is still unclear whether a cutoff value of preoperative A1c represents an increased risk for major postoperative complications following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) and Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG). METHODS: Retrospective MBSAQIP Participant Use File cohort for both years 2017 and 2018 were analyzed to evaluate the relationship between HbA1c in patients with morbid obesity and T2DM undergoing bariatric surgery, and the 30 days postoperative major complications by Clavien-Dindo classification (III/IV). We used an HbA1c cutoff of <7, > =7, and stratified by 1% increment for a total of 11 groups. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression to analyze the outcome of the complications. Predicted probabilities were calculated for major complications. All statistical tests were two-sided with a P-value of less than .05 considered as a cut-off for statistical significance. RESULTS: Of 42,181 patients that met inclusion criteria, there were 20,955 identified with HbA1c <7%, and 21,226 patients with HbA1c >7%. Utilizing HbA1c <7% as a cutoff, we found no consistent statistical significance in the major postoperative complication in patients with HbA1c >7%, and when stratified with 1% increment between groups. We also found no significance between groups with risk adjustment. CONCLUSIONS: Extensive analysis of the large MBSAQIP cohort didn't result in a clinically significant association between stratified HbA1c and 30-day Clavien-Dindo major complications (III/IV) following Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) and (SG).

Asymptomatic Cholelithiasis and Bariatric Surgery: a Comprehensive Long-Term Analysis of the Risks of Biliary Disease in Patients Undergoing Primary Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

PURPOSE: Currently, there is little consensus on management of the in situ gallbladder of patients undergoing gastric bypass. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes of selective concomitant cholecystectomy (CCY) and long-term biliary outcomes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing laparoscopic RYGB (LRYGB) between 2008 and 2018. Chi-square, Fisher's exact, or Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to compare outcomes. Concomitant CCY was performed on a selective basis. RESULTS: Three thousand and four patients underwent a RYGB (LRYGB n = 2458, open RYGB n = 546). Fifty-two percent (n = 1670) of patients had undergone CCY at any stage. Thirty-one percent of patients (n = 933) had CCY prior to RYGB, 13% (n = 403) had a concomitant CCY and 13% (n = 214) of the remainder required interval CCY. In the LRYGB subgroup, 29.9% (n = 735) had a prior CCY; 12.9% (n = 202) of those with an in situ gallbladder required interval CCY. Those who underwent concomitant CCY/LRYGB (n = 328) were compared with LRYGB alone (n = 1231). The concomitant CCY group was significantly older and had higher percentage of females, higher preoperative BMI, higher Charlson Comorbidity Index, and a higher medication count. There was no significant difference in BMI nadir, length of stay, complications, or mortality. Interval CCY had a higher incidence of CCY-related complications. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests a higher percentage of bariatric patients with in situ gallbladders will undergo interval CCY than documented in recently published guidelines. Concomitant CCY can be performed without an increase in length of stay or complications. Interval CCY may be associated with a higher complication rate.

The Longitudinal Efficiency of Robotic Surgery: an MBSAQIP Propensity Matched 4-Year Comparison of Robotic and Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine the MBSAQIP database to assess efficiency trends and perioperative outcomes in robotic bariatric surgery. METHODS: Robotic (RA) and laparoscopic (L) sleeve gastrectomy (SG) and gastric bypass (RYGB) were compared using the 2015-2018 MBSAQIP Participant Use Data Files. Patients were propensity matched 1:1 based on sex, body mass index, assistant, and previous obesity or foregut surgery. A total of 93,802 patients were included. RESULTS: Median operative times were significantly longer for both RA-SG (89 vs. 62 min; p < 0.0001) and RA-RYGB (141 vs. 105 min; p < 0.0001) compared with laparoscopic. Over the 4-year period, the difference in operative times (OR delta) between RA-SG and L-SG was unchanged while the difference in operative times between RA-RYGB and L-RYGB increased. Both robotic groups were significantly more likely to be readmitted (RA-SG p = 0.001, RA-RYGB p = 0.006). Robotic SG was more likely to have a reintervention (p = 0.018) and extended length of stay (LOS) (> 4 days) compared with laparoscopic (p = < 0.0002). No significant differences were noted in morbidity and mortality by approach. CONCLUSIONS: Operative times were 30% longer for RA-SG and 25% longer for RA-RYGB when compared with laparoscopic. There was no significant improvement in OR delta for either RA-SG or RA-RYGB over the four years. Readmission rates were higher for both RA-SG and RA-RYGB. Robotic SG had a greater percentage of patients with extended LOS compared with laparoscopic. No evidence of improved efficiency for robotic bariatric surgery as defined by operative time or clinical outcomes was identified.

Comparative effectiveness of minimally invasive and open distal pancreatectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma.

IMPORTANCE: Multicenter studies indicate that outcomes of open (ODP) and minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) are equivalent for benign lesions. However, data for pancreatic carcinoma are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of ODP and MIDP for early-stage pancreatic ductal carcinoma to determine relative safety and oncologic efficacy. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of 62 consecutive patients undergoing ODP or MIDP for pancreatic ductal carcinoma by intention to treat with propensity scoring to correct for selection bias. SETTING: A high-volume university center for pancreatic surgery. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-two patients at a single institution. INTERVENTIONS: Patients underwent ODP or MIDP. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative mortality, morbidity, readmission, postoperative complications, disease progression, and overall survival. RESULTS: Thirty-four patients underwent ODP, and 28 underwent MIDP with 5 conversions to ODP. No significant differences in age, body mass index, performance status, tumor size, or radiographic stage were identified. High rates of margin-negative resection (ODP, 88%; MIDP, 86%) and median lymph node clearance (ODP, 12; MIDP, 11) were achieved in both groups with equal rates and severity of postoperative complications (ODP, 50%; MIDP, 39%) and pancreatic fistula (ODP, 29%; MIDP, 21%). Despite conversions, intended MIDP was associated with reduced blood loss (P = .006) and length of stay (P = .04). Conversion was associated with a poor histologic grade and positive nodes. Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 19 (95% CI, 14-47) months. Minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy was performed increasingly in later study years and for patients with a higher Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index. Overall survival after ODP or intended MIDP was equivalent after adjusting for comorbidity and year of surgery (relative hazard, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.47-2.62]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We detected no evidence that MIDP was inferior to ODP based on postoperative outcomes or overall survival. This conclusion was verified by propensity score analysis with adjustment for factors affecting selection of operative technique.

Robotic-assisted minimally invasive central pancreatectomy: technique and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Central pancreatectomy is a definitive treatment for low-grade tumors of the pancreatic neck that preserves pancreatic and splenic function at the potential expense of postoperative pancreatic fistula. We analyzed outcomes after robot-assisted central pancreatectomy (RACP) to reexamine the risk-benefit profile in the era of minimally invasive surgery. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of nine RACP performed between August 2009 through June 2010 at a single institution. RESULTS: The average age of the cohort was 64 (range 18-75 years) with six women (67 %). Indications for surgery included: five benign cystic neoplasm and four pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor. Median operative time was 425 min (range 305-506 min) with 190 ml median blood loss (range 50-350 ml) and one conversion to open due to poor visualization. Median tumor size was 3.0 cm (range 1.9-6.0 cm); all patients achieved R0 status. Pancreaticogastrostomy was performed in seven cases and pancreaticojejunostomy in two. The median length of hospital stay was 10 days (range 7-19). Two clinically significant pancreatic fistulae occurred with one requiring percutaneous drainage. No patients exhibited worsening diabetes or exocrine insufficiency at the 30-day postoperative visit. CONCLUSIONS: RACP can be performed with safety and oncologic outcomes equivalent to published open series. Although the rate of pancreatic fistula was high, only 22 % had clinically significant events, and none developed worsening pancreatic endocrine or exocrine dysfunction.

Distal pancreatectomy with en bloc celiac axis resection for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND: Celiac trunk encasement by adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic body is generally regarded as a contraindication for surgical resection. Recent studies have suggested that a subset of stage III patients will succumb to their disease in the absence of distant metastases. We hypothesized that patients with stage III tumors invading the celiac trunk, who are free of distant disease following neoadjuvant therapy, may derive prolonged survival benefit from aggressive surgical resection. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of distal pancreatectomies with en bloc celiac axis resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Eleven patients underwent a distal pancreatectomy with en bloc celiac axis resection after completing neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Median operative time was 8 h, 14 min, and median estimated blood loss was 700 ml. Median length of stay was 9 days. Five patients (45%) had postoperative complications; three were Clavien grade I. Four patients (35%) had pancreatic leaks; two were ISGPF grade B, and two were grade A. There were two 90-day perioperative deaths. Ten patients had R0 resections (91%). After a median follow-up of 41 weeks, six patients recurred. Four of the five patients with SMAD4 loss recurred, and two of the five patients with intact SMAD4 recurred. Median disease-free and overall survival were 21 weeks and 26 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Resection of pancreatic body adenocarcinoma with celiac axis resection is technically feasible with acceptable perioperative morbidity and mortality.