Outcomes of an Algorithmic, Multidisciplinary Approach to Rectourethral Fistula Repair: A Pre- and Postintervention Quasi-Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: Rectourethral fistulas are a rare yet severe complication of prostate surgery, pelvic irradiation therapy, or both. Multiple surgical repairs exist with widely varying success rates. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to present our institutional multidisciplinary algorithm for rectourethral fistula repair and its outcomes. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, pre- and postintervention, quasi-experimental design, comparing the frequency of fistula healing and reversal of urinary and fecal diversion before and after implementation of our algorithm. SETTING: All patients who presented to the Duke University with rectourethral fistula between 2002 and 2019 were included. PATIENTS: This study included 79 patients treated for rectourethral fistula: 36 prealgorithm and 43 postalgorithm. INTERVENTIONS: Our multidisciplinary algorithm was implemented in 2012. Patients with fistulas <2 cm and without history of radiation therapy underwent York-Mason repair, whereas those with fistulas 2-3 cm or with prior irradiation underwent transperineal repair with gracilis flap interposition. Those with nonrepairable fistulas (>3 cm or fixed tissues) underwent pelvic exenteration. Before repair, the algorithm recommended all patients to undergo urinary and bowel diversion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The 2 primary outcomes were rectourethral fistula healing, defined as both radiographic and clinical resolutions, and reversal of urinary and fecal diversions. RESULTS: Frequency of fistula healing improved in the post- versus prealgorithm subgroups (93.1% vs 71.9%; p = 0.04). The relative risk of fistula healing pre- versus postintervention was 0.77 (0.61-0.98; p = 0.04) among the overall cohort. Eighteen patients (22.8%) underwent pelvic exenteration for nonrepairable fistulas and were not included in primary outcome measures. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include the study's retrospective nature, possible selection bias because of algorithmic patient selection, and small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a multidisciplinary institutional algorithm improved rectourethral fistula repair success with high rates of ostomy reversal. Proper patient selection and multidisciplinary involvement are paramount to this success. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B955 . RESULTADOS DE UN ABORDAJE ALGORTMICO Y MULTIDISCIPLINARIO PARA LA REPARACIN DE FSTULAS RECTOURETRALES UN ESTUDIO CUASIEXPERIMENTAL PREVIO Y POSTERIOR A LA INTERVENCIN: ANTECEDENTES:Las fístulas rectouretrales son una complicación rara pero grave de la cirugía de próstata, la radiación pélvica o ambas. Existen múltiples reparaciones quirúrgicas con tasas de éxito muy variables.OBJETIVO:Presentar el algoritmo multidisciplinario de nuestra institución para la reparación de fístulas rectouretrales y sus resultados.DISEÑO:Este fue un diseño retrospectivo, previo y posterior a la intervención, cuasiexperimental, que comparó la frecuencia de curación de la fístula y la reversión de la derivación urinaria y fecal antes y después de la implementación de nuestro algoritmo.ESCENARIO:Se incluyeron todos los pacientes que acudieron a Duke con fístula rectouretral entre 2002 y 2019.PACIENTES:Setenta y nueve pacientes fueron tratados por fístula rectouretral; 36 pre-algoritmo y 43 post-algoritmo.INTERVENCIONES:Nuestro algoritmo multidisciplinario se implementó en 2012. Los pacientes con fístulas <2 cm y sin antecedentes de radiación se sometieron a reparación de York-Mason, mientras que aquellos con fístulas de 2-3 cm o radiación pélvica previa se sometieron a reparación transperineal con interposición de colgajo de gracilis. Aquellos con fístulas no reparables (> 3 cm o tejidos fijos) fueron sometidos a exenteración pélvica. Antes de la reparación, el algoritmo recomomendó que todos los pacientes se sometieran a una derivación urinaria y fecal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los dos resultados primarios fueron la curación de la fístula rectouretral, definida como la resolución radiográfica y clínica, y la reversión de las derivaciones urinaria y fecale.RESULTADOS:La frecuencia de curación de la fístula mejoró en el subgrupo post-algoritmo vs. pre-algoritmo (93.1% vs. 71.9%, p = 0.04). El riesgo relativo de curación de la fístula antes de la intervención en comparación con después de la intervención fue de 0.77 (0.61-0.98, p = 0.04) entre la cohorte general. Dieciocho pacientes (22.8%) se sometieron a exenteración pélvica por fístulas no reparables y, por lo tanto, no se incluyeron en las medidas de resultado primarias.LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones de este estudio incluyen su naturaleza retrospectiva, posible sesgo de selección debido a la selección algorítmica de pacientes y un tamaño de muestra pequeño.CONCLUSIONES:La implementación de un algoritmo institucional multidisciplinario mejoró el éxito en la reparación de la fístula rectouretral con altas tasas de reversión de la ostomía. La selección adecuada de pacientes y la participación multidisciplinaria son fundamentales para este éxito. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B955 . (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

A Risk-Prediction Platform for Acute Kidney Injury and 30-Day Readmission After Colorectal Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Few known risk factors for certain surgical complications are prospectively analyzed to ascertain their influence on outcomes. Health systems can use integrated machine-learning-derived algorithms to provide information regarding patients' risk status in real time and pair this data with interventions to improve outcomes. The purpose of this work was to evaluate whether real-time knowledge of patients' calculated risk status paired with a stratified intervention was associated with a reduction in acute kidney injury and 30-d readmission following colorectal surgery. METHODS: Unblinded, retrospective study, evaluating the impact of an electronic health record-integrated and autonomous algorithm-based clinical decision support tool (KelaHealth, San Francisco, California) on acute kidney injury and 30-d readmission following colorectal surgery at a single academic medical center between January 1, 2020, and December 31, 2020, relative to a propensity-matched historical cohort (2014-2018) prior to algorithm integration (January 11, 2019). RESULTS: 3617 patients underwent colorectal surgery during the control period and 665 underwent surgery during the treatment period; 1437 historical control patients were matched to 479 risk-based patients for the study. Utilization of the risk-based management platform was associated with a 2.5% decrease in the rate of acute kidney injury (11.3% to 8.8%) and 3.1% decrease in rate of readmissions (12% to 8.9%). CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found significant reductions in postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) and unplanned readmissions after the implementation of an algorithm based clinical decision support tool that risk-stratified populations and offered stratified interventions. This opens up an opportunity for further investigation in translating similar risk platform approaches across surgical specialties.

Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review.

Importance: Approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery will experience infection at or adjacent to the surgical incision site. Compared with patients undergoing surgery who do not have a surgical site infection, those with a surgical site infection are hospitalized approximately 7 to 11 days longer. Observations: Most surgical site infections can be prevented if appropriate strategies are implemented. These infections are typically caused when bacteria from the patient's endogenous flora are inoculated into the surgical site at the time of surgery. Development of an infection depends on various factors such as the health of the patient's immune system, presence of foreign material, degree of bacterial wound contamination, and use of antibiotic prophylaxis. Although numerous strategies are recommended by international organizations to decrease surgical site infection, only 6 general strategies are supported by randomized trials. Interventions that are associated with lower rates of infection include avoiding razors for hair removal (4.4% with razors vs 2.5% with clippers); decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures (0.8% with decolonization vs 2% without); use of chlorhexidine gluconate and alcohol-based skin preparation (4.0% with chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol vs 6.5% with povidone iodine plus alcohol); maintaining normothermia with active warming such as warmed intravenous fluids, skin warming, and warm forced air to keep the body temperature warmer than 36 °C (4.7% with active warming vs 13% without); perioperative glycemic control (9.4% with glucose <150 mg/dL vs 16% with glucose >150 mg/dL); and use of negative pressure wound therapy (9.7% with vs 15% without). Guidelines recommend appropriate dosing, timing, and choice of preoperative parenteral antimicrobial prophylaxis. Conclusions and Relevance: Surgical site infections affect approximately 0.5% to 3% of patients undergoing surgery and are associated with longer hospital stays than patients with no surgical site infections. Avoiding razors for hair removal, maintaining normothermia, use of chlorhexidine gluconate plus alcohol-based skin preparation agents, decolonization with intranasal antistaphylococcal agents and antistaphylococcal skin antiseptics for high-risk procedures, controlling for perioperative glucose concentrations, and using negative pressure wound therapy can reduce the rate of surgical site infections.

Evolution of minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer: update from the national cancer database.

BACKGROUND: As the use of minimally invasive techniques in colorectal surgery has become increasingly prevalent, concerns remain about the oncologic effectiveness and long-term outcomes of minimally invasive low anterior resection (MI-LAR) for the treatment of rectal cancer. STUDY DESIGN: The 2010-2015 National Cancer Database (NCDB) Participant Data Use File was queried for patients undergoing elective open LAR (OLAR) or MI-LAR for rectal adenocarcinoma. A 1:1 propensity match was performed on the basis of demographics, comorbidity, and tumor characteristics. Outcomes were compared between groups and Cox proportional hazard modeling was performed to identify independent predictors of mortality. A subset analysis was performed on high-volume academic centers. RESULTS: 35,809 patients undergoing LAR were identified of whom 18,265 (51.0%) underwent MI-LAR. After propensity matching, patients receiving MI-LAR were less likely to have a positive circumferential radial margin (CRM) (5.5% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.0094) or a positive distal margin (3.6% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.0022) and had decreased 90-day all-cause mortality (2.0% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.0238). MI-LAR resulted in decreased hospital length of stay (5 vs. 6 days, p < 0.0001) but a greater rate of 30-day readmission (7.6% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.0054). Long-term overall survival was improved with MI-LAR (79% vs. 76%, p < 0.0001). Cox proportional hazard modeling demonstrated a decreased risk of mortality with MI-LAR (HR 0.859, 95% CI 0.788-0.937). CONCLUSION: MI-LAR is associated with improvement in CRM clearance and long-term survival. In the hands of experienced surgeons with advanced laparoscopy skills, MI-LAR appears safe and effective technique for the management of rectal cancer.

Roadmap for Transforming Preoperative Assessment to Preoperative Optimization.

Preoperative assessment typically equates to evaluating and accepting the presenting condition of the patient (unless extreme) and commonly occurs only a few days before the planned surgery. While this timing enables a preoperative history and examination and mitigates unexpected findings on the day of surgery that may delay throughput, it does not allow for meaningful preoperative management of modifiable medical conditions. Evidence is limited regarding how best to balance efforts to mitigate modifiable risk factors versus the timing of surgery. Furthermore, while the concept of preoperative risk modification is not novel, evidence is lacking for successful and sustained implementation of such an interdisciplinary, collaborative program. A better understanding of perioperative care coordination and, specifically, implementing a preoperative preparation process can enhance the value of surgery and surgical population health. In this article, we describe the implementation of a collaborative preoperative clinic with the primary goal of improving patient outcomes.

Modified V-Y Fasciocutaneous Flap Reconstruction After Abdominoperineal Resection in Irradiated Patients Prevents Wound Dehiscence and Associated Complications: A Retrospective Analysis and Benchtop Confirmation.

BACKGROUND: Primary perineal closure following abdominal perineal resection (APR) is reported to have a wound complication rate as high as 66%, whereas flap reconstruction reduces wound complications to 15% to 35%. A modified de-epithelialized V-Y fasciocutaneous flap aims to further improve results in this patient population. METHODS: To study the breaking force of a simple interrupted suture in either skin or subcutaneous fat, various quantitative assessments were performed in a porcine flap model using uniaxial static tensile testing with an Instron tensiometer, with a single or triple row of 3 Vicryl sutures in both skin and fat.An outcomes analysis was performed in 24 patients who underwent modified V-Y flap reconstruction after APR. Primary outcome was wound complications including infection, dehiscence, seroma, hematoma, and pelvic fluid collections. RESULTS: Tensile strength of sutures anchored in skin was found to be up to 8 times stronger than sutures anchored in subcutaneous fat in a single row and 3 times as strong in 3 rows (breaking force, 500.2 N vs 263.7 N). In our patient cohort of 24 irradiated cancer patients, 10 (42%) had wound healing complications. Wound dehiscence of various degrees accounted for 80% of these complications. Five patients with wound complications (50%) had associated pelvic fluid collections (infection, 1; wound dehiscence, 4). Minor dehiscence was more likely to occur after suture removal and less likely to be associated with pelvic collections compared to patients with major dehiscence. Our study yields total complication rates lower than what is reported in the literature for anterolateral thigh or gracilis flap including much lower infection rates, and almost similar results to the commonly used vertical rectus myocutaneous muscle. CONCLUSION: Tension-free de-epithelialized V-Y flap use after APR effectively reconstructs the defect while eliminating an additional donor site. Benchtop studies suggest enhanced flap integrity yielded by layered closure. Wound complications can be managed with local care in their majority (90%). Staggering or delaying suture removal can decrease minor dehiscence. Based on analysis of our results, review of the literature and consideration of donor site morbidity, we believe that modified V-Y flap is the best approach for APR reconstruction in irradiated patients.

Impact of Disgust on Intentions to Undergo Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons present patients with complex information at the perioperative appointment. Emotions likely play a role in surgical decision-making, and disgust is an emotion of revulsion at a stimulus that can lead to avoidance. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of disgust on intention to undergo surgical resection for colorectal cancer and recall of perioperative instructions. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional observational study conducted online using hypothetical scenarios with nonpatient subjects. SETTINGS: The study was conducted using Amazon's Mechanical Turk. PATIENTS: Survey respondents were living in the United States. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Surgery intention and recall of perioperative instructions were measured. RESULTS: A total of 319 participants met the inclusion criteria. Participants in the experimental condition, who were provided with detailed information and pictures about stoma care, had significantly lower surgery intentions (mean ± SD, 4.60 ± 1.15) compared with the control condition with no stoma prompt (mean ± SD, 5.14 ± 0.91; p = 0.05) and significantly lower recall for preoperative instructions (mean ± SD, 13.75 ± 2.38) compared with the control condition (mean ± SD, 14.36 ± 2.19; p = 0.03). Those within the experimental conditions also reported significantly higher state levels of disgust (mean ± SD, 4.08 ± 1.74) compared with a control condition (mean ± SD, 2.35 ± 1.38; p < 0.001). State-level disgust was found to fully mediate the relationship between condition and recall (b = -0.31) and to partially mediate the effect of condition on surgery intentions (b = 0.17). LIMITATIONS: It is unknown whether these results will replicate with patients and the impact of competing emotions in clinical settings. CONCLUSIONS: Intentions to undergo colorectal surgery and recall of preoperative instructions are diminished in patients who experience disgust when presented with stoma information. Surgeons and care teams must account for this as they perform perioperative counseling to minimize interference with recall of important perioperative information. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A776.

Local excision results in comparable survival to radical resection for early-stage rectal carcinoid.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists regarding current National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, which recommend local excision for rectal carcinoids ≤2 cm and radical resection for tumors >2 cm. Given the limited data examining optimal surgical approach for these lesions, we queried a national database to determine the impact of extent of resection on survival. METHODS: Patients undergoing treatment for clinical stage I and II rectal carcinoid (RC) were identified from the National Cancer Data Base (1998-2012). The association between extent of surgery, tumor size, and the likelihood of pathologic lymph node positivity was examined. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to compare overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 1900 patients were identified, of whom 1644 (86.5%) were treated with local excision, and 256 (13.5%) were treated with radical resection. A significant majority of patients with tumors ≤2.0 cm (89.0%) and nearly half with tumors 2.1-4.0 cm (44.8%) or >4.0 cm (45.8%) underwent local excision. Nodal positivity was correlated with tumor size (7.1% positivity with ≤2.0 cm tumors, 31.3% with 2.1-4.0 cm tumors, and 50.0% with >4 cm tumors). However, 5-y survival was equivalent between surgical approaches for tumors ≤2 cm (93.0% versus 93.0%) and tumors 2.1-4.0 cm (76.0% versus 76.0%). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate in early-stage RC that nearly half of intermediate and large tumors are being treated with local excision outside National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. In addition, radical resection does not appear to be associated with improved overall survival for tumors of any size. These findings suggest that the preferred approach to early-stage RCs without aggressive biological characteristics is local excision due to the decreased morbidity and mortality versus radical resection.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Preoperative Chemoradiation Improves Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Practice guidelines differ in their support of adjuvant chemotherapy use in patients who received preoperative chemoradiation for rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to evaluate the adjusted survival differences. SETTINGS: Data were collected from the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Adults with pathologic stage II and III rectal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation and surgery were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival was measured. RESULTS: Among 12,696 patients included, 4023 (32%) received adjuvant chemotherapy. The use of adjuvant chemotherapy increased over the study period from 23% to 36%. Although older age and black race were associated with a lower likelihood of receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, patients with higher education level and stage III disease were more likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (all p < 0.05). At 7 years, overall survival was improved among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (60% vs. 55%; p < 0.001). After risk adjustment, the use of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved survival (HR = 0.81 (95% CI, 0.72-0.91); p < 0.001). In the subgroup of patients with stage II disease, survival was also improved among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (68% vs 58% at 7 y; p < 0.001; HR = 0.70 (95% CI, 0.57-0.87); p = 0.002). Among patients with stage III disease, the use of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with a smaller but persistent survival benefit (56% vs 51% at 7 y; p = 0.017; HR = 0.85 (95% CI, 0.74-0.98); p = 0.026). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its potential for selection bias and inability to compare specific chemotherapy regimens. CONCLUSIONS: The use of adjuvant chemotherapy among patients with rectal cancer who received preoperative chemoradiation conferred a survival benefit. This study emphasizes the importance of adjuvant chemotherapy in the management of rectal cancer and advocates for its increased use in the setting of neoadjuvant therapy. See Video Abstract at http://link.lww.com/DCR/A428.

Minimally Invasive Versus Open Low Anterior Resection: Equivalent Survival in a National Analysis of 14,033 Patients With Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To examine survival of patients who underwent minimally invasive versus open low anterior resection (LAR) for rectal cancer. BACKGROUND: Utilization of laparoscopic and robotic LAR for rectal cancer has steadily increased. Short-term outcomes between these techniques and open surgery have shown equivalent results; however, survival outcomes are unknown. METHODS: Adults from the National Cancer Data Base undergoing LAR for rectal adenocarcinoma were identified. Patients were stratified by intent-to-treat into open (OLAR) or minimally invasive LAR (MI-LAR). Multivariable modeling was used to compare short-term outcomes and survival between MI-LAR and OLAR and between laparoscopic (LLAR) and robotic LAR (RLAR). RESULTS: Among 14,033 patients included, 57.8% underwent OLAR and 42.2% MI-LAR. After adjustment, MI-LAR was associated with shorter length of stay (P < 0.001), but similar rates of positive margins, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, and use of adjuvant therapies (all P > 0.05). At 36 months, there was no difference in adjusted risk of mortality between MI-LAR and OLAR (hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, P = 0.089). In a subgroup analysis of LLAR versus RLAR, there were no differences in lymph node harvest, margin positivity, length of stay, readmission rate, 30-day mortality, or overall survival after adjustment (all P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive LAR for rectal cancer is associated with similar overall survival with the benefit of shorter hospitalization. Although the conversion rate is lower, robotic LAR is not associated with superior oncologic outcomes compared to laparoscopic LAR. Our findings support the ongoing adoption of minimally invasive techniques for rectal adenocarcinoma.

Alvimopan Provides Additional Improvement in Outcomes and Cost Savings in Enhanced Recovery Colorectal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of alvimopan on outcomes and costs in a rigorous enhanced recovery colorectal surgery protocol. BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus remains a major source of morbidity and costs in colorectal surgery. Alvimopan has been shown to reduce incidence of postoperative ileus in enhanced recovery colorectal surgery; however, data are equivocal regarding its benefit in reducing length of stay and costs. METHODS: Patients undergoing major elective enhanced recovery colorectal surgery were identified from a prospectively-collected database (2010-2013). Multivariable analyses were employed to compare outcomes and hospital costs among patients who had alvimopan versus no alvimopan by adjusting for demographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 660 patients were included; 197 patients received alvimopan and 463 patients had no alvimopan. In unadjusted analysis, the alvimopan group had a faster return of bowel function, shorter length of stay, and lower rates of ileus, Foley re-insertion, and urinary tract infection (all P < 0.01). After adjustment, alvimopan was associated with a faster return of bowel function by 0.6 day (P = 0.0006), and lower incidence of postoperative ileus (odds ratio 0.23, P = 0.0002). With adjustment, alvimopan was associated with a shorter length of stay by 1.6 days (P = 0.002), and a hospital cost savings of $1492 per patient (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Alvimopan administration as an element of enhanced recovery colorectal surgery is associated with faster return of bowel function, lower incidence of postoperative ileus, shorter hospitalization, and a significant cost savings. These results suggest that alvimopan is cost-effective in the setting of enhanced recovery colorectal surgery protocols, and should therefore be considered in these programs.

Determining the Optimal Timing for Initiation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy After Resection for Stage II and III Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several reports suggest that the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy on survival diminishes over time for colon cancer; however, precise timing of its loss of benefit has not been established. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the relationship between time to adjuvant chemotherapy and survival and to identify a threshold for increased risk of mortality. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard modeling with restricted cubic splines was used to evaluate the adjusted association between time to adjuvant chemotherapy and overall survival and to establish an optimal threshold for the initiation of therapy. SETTINGS: Data were collected from the National Cancer Data Base. PATIENTS: Adults who received adjuvant chemotherapy following resection of stage II to III colon cancers were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 7794 patients were included. After adjusting for clinical, tumor, and treatment characteristics, our model determined a critical threshold of chemotherapy initiation at 44 days from surgery, after which there was an increase in the overall mortality. At a median follow-up of 61 months, the risk of mortality was increased in those who received adjuvant chemotherapy after 44 days from surgery (adjusted HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.24; p = 0.002), but not in those who received chemotherapy before 44 days from surgery (p = 0.11). Each additional week of delay was associated with a 7% decrease in survival (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.04-1.10; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by selection bias and the inability to compare specific chemotherapy regimens. CONCLUSIONS: This study objectively determines the optimal timing of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with resected colon cancer. Delay beyond 6 weeks is associated with compromised survival. These findings emphasize the importance of the timely initiation of therapy, and suggest that efforts to enhance recovery following surgery have the potential to improve survival by decreasing delay to adjuvant chemotherapy.

Surgical Resection of the Primary Tumor in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer Without Metastasectomy is Associated With Improved Overall Survival Compared With Chemotherapy/Radiation Therapy Alone.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists over whether resection of the primary tumor in stage IV colorectal cancer with inoperable metastases improves patient outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether resection of the primary tumor without metastasectomy in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer is associated with improved overall survival compared with patients undergoing chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy alone. DESIGN: This was a retrospective review of a multi-institutional dataset. SETTINGS: This study was conducted in all participating commission on cancer (CoC)-accredited facilities. PATIENTS: The 2003-2006 National Cancer Data Base was reviewed to identify patients with stage IV adenocarcinoma of the colon or rectum who underwent palliative treatment without curative intent, either in the form of surgical resection of the primary tumor without metastasectomy consisting of a colectomy or rectal resection with or without chemotherapy and/or radiation or chemotherapy and/or radiation alone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Groups were compared for baseline characteristics. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis before and after propensity matching with a 1:1 nearest-neighbor algorithm. RESULTS: Of the 1446 patients included in the analysis, 231 (16%) underwent surgical resection of the primary tumor without metastasectomy. Surgical resection was associated with a significant survival benefit on unadjusted analysis (median survival, 9.2 vs. 7.6 months; p < 0.01). After propensity matching to adjust for nonrandom treatment selection, surgical resection continued to be associated with a significant survival benefit (median survival, 9.2 vs. 7.3 months; p < 0.01). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the potential for selection bias regarding which patients received surgical resection. There was also a lack of data regarding the indication for operation, specifically whether a patient was symptomatic or asymptomatic before resection. The inability to account for tumor size or grade among patients who did not receive surgical resection was another limitation. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical resection of the primary tumor without metastasectomy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer is associated with improved survival as compared with chemotherapy/radiation therapy alone. Additional research is necessary to determine which patients may benefit from this intervention.

Combined Mechanical and Oral Antibiotic Bowel Preparation Reduces Incisional Surgical Site Infection and Anastomotic Leak Rates After Elective Colorectal Resection: An Analysis of Colectomy-Targeted ACS NSQIP.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association between preoperative bowel preparation and 30-day outcomes after elective colorectal resection. METHODS: Patients from the 2012 Colectomy-Targeted American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database who underwent elective colorectal resection were included for analysis and assigned to 1 of 4 groups based on the type of preoperative preparation they received [combined mechanical and oral antibiotic preparation (OAP), mechanical preparation only, OAP only, or no preoperative bowel preparation]. The association between preoperative bowel preparation status and 30-day postoperative outcomes was assessed using multivariate regression analysis to adjust for a robust array of patient- and procedure-related factors. RESULTS: A total of 4999 patients were included for this study [1494 received (29.9%) combined mechanical and OAP, 2322 (46.5%) received mechanical preparation only, 91 (1.8%) received OAP only, and 1092 (21.8%) received no preoperative preparation]. Compared to patients receiving no preoperative preparation, patients who received combined preparation demonstrated a lower 30-day incidence of postoperative incisional surgical site infection (3.2% vs 9.0%, P < 0.001), anastomotic leakage (2.8% vs 5.7%, P = 0.001), and procedure-related hospital readmission (5.5% vs 8.0%, P = 0.03). The outcomes of patients who received either mechanical or OAP alone did not differ significantly from those who received no preparation. CONCLUSIONS: Combined bowel preparation with mechanical cleansing and oral antibiotics results in a significantly lower incidence of incisional surgical site infection, anastomotic leakage, and hospital readmission when compared to no preoperative bowel preparation.

Robotic Low Anterior Resection for Rectal Cancer: A National Perspective on Short-term Oncologic Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines short-term outcomes and pathologic surrogates of oncologic results among patients undergoing robotic versus laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches. BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopic low anterior resection (LLAR) has gained popularity as an acceptable approach, the robotic low anterior resection (RLAR) remains largely unproven. We compared short-term oncologic outcomes between rectal cancer patients undergoing either RLAR or LLAR. STUDY DESIGN: All patients with rectal cancer in the National Cancer Data Base undergoing RLAR or LLAR from 2010 to 2011 were included. Predictors of RLAR were modeled with multivariable logistic regression. Groups were matched on propensity to undergo RLAR. Primary endpoints included lymph node retrieval and margin status, whereas secondary 30-day outcomes were mortality, hospital length of stay (LOS), and unplanned readmission rates. RESULTS: A total of 6403 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 956 (14.9%) underwent RLAR. RLAR patients were more likely to be treated at academic centers, receive neoadjuvant therapy, and have higher T-stage and longer time to surgery (all P < 0.001). Neoadjuvant therapy and treatment at an academic/research center remained the only significant predictors of robotic use after multivariable adjustment. After propensity matching, RLAR was associated with lower conversion (9.5 vs 16.4%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in lymph node retrieval, margin status, 30-day mortality, readmission, or hospital LOS. CONCLUSIONS: In this largest series to date, we demonstrated equivalent perioperative safety and patient outcomes for robotic compared to LLAR in the setting of rectal cancer. Although the robotic approach required significantly fewer conversions to open, surrogates for proper oncologic surgery were nearly identical between the 2 approaches, suggesting that a robotic approach may be a suitable alternative. Further studies comparing long-term cancer recurrence and survival should be performed.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for t1 node-positive colon cancers provides significant survival benefit.

BACKGROUND: Contemporary treatment of node-positive (N+) colon cancer consists of adjuvant chemotherapy; however, randomized data supporting this practice were derived from lesions T2 or greater. Minimal data exist regarding the use and need for adjuvant chemotherapy in T1N+ disease. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine treatment trends and the effects of adjuvant chemotherapy on T1N+ colon cancers by using the National Cancer Database. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study. Baseline demographics, tumor, and cancer treatment characteristics were compared. Groups were matched on the propensity to receive chemotherapy. Adjusted long-term survival stratified by chemotherapy use was compared by using the Kaplan-Meier method with the log-rank test. Predictors of not receiving chemotherapy were identified by using a multivariable logistic regression model. SETTINGS: Data were collected from the National Cancer Database, which collects cancer data from over 1500 cancer centers. PATIENTS: We identified patients from 1998 to 2006 with T1N+ disease, excluding those with metastatic disease or previous cancer. Patients were stratified based on whether or not they received chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure of this study was long-term survival. RESULTS: Three thousand one hundred thirty-seven patients had T1N+ disease; 70.6% (n = 2216) received chemotherapy, and utilization significantly increased from 1998 to 2011 (p < 0.001). Unadjusted analysis revealed that patients treated with chemotherapy were statistically younger and healthier, and had shorter postoperative lengths of stay (all p < 0.001). Unadjusted 5-year survival was higher in patients receiving chemotherapy (87.9% vs 63.0% in patients with no chemotherapy; p < 0.001) and this persisted after propensity matching with (83.4% and 63.0% in patients with or without chemotherapy; p < 0.001). Only age (OR, 0.29; p < 0.001) predicted not receiving chemotherapy. LIMITATIONS: Limitations include potential selection bias as well as the inability to compare disease-free survival/recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant chemotherapy appears to significantly improve long-term survival in patients receiving chemotherapy in T1N+ disease. Thus, the use of chemotherapy in T1N+ disease is justified and provides a highly significant survival benefit.

Ureteral stenting in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined the current status of ureteral stent use or the indications for stenting, particularly in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. This study examines current national trends and predictors of ureteral stenting in patients undergoing major colorectal operations and the subsequent effects on perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement participant user files were used to identify patients undergoing laparoscopic segmental colectomy, low anterior resection, or proctectomy. Trends in stent use were assessed across procedure types. To estimate the predictors of stent utilization, a forward-stepwise logistic regression model was used. A 3:1 nearest neighbor propensity match with subsequent multivariable adjustment was then used to estimate the impact of stents. RESULTS: A total of 42,311 cases were identified, of which 1795 (4.2%) underwent ureteral stent placement. Predictors of stent utilization included diverticular disease, need for radical resection (versus segmental colectomy), recent radiotherapy, and more recent calendar year. After adjustment, ureteral stenting appeared to be associated with a small increase in median operative time (44 min) and a trivial increase in length of stay (5.4%, P<0.001). However, there were no significant differences in morbidity or mortality. CONCLUSIONS: We describe the clinical predictors of ureteral stent usage in this patient population and report that while stenting adds to operative time, it is not associated with significantly increased morbidity or mortality after adjusting for diagnosis and comorbidities. Focused institutional studies are necessary in the future to address the utility of ureteral stents in the identification and possible prevention of iatrogenic injury.

Wound classification reporting in HPB surgery: can a single word change public perception of institutional performance?

INTRODUCTION: The drive to improve outcomes and the inevitability of mandated public reporting necessitate uniform documentation and accurate databases. The reporting of wound classification in patients undergoing hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) surgery and the impact of inconsistencies on quality metrics were investigated. METHODS: The 2005-2011 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) participant use file was interrogated to identify patients undergoing HPB resections. The effect of wound classification on post-operative surgical site infection (SSI) rates was determined through logistic regression. The impact of variations in wound classification reporting on perceived outcomes was modelled by simulating observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios for SSI. RESULTS: In total, 27,376 patients were identified with significant heterogeneity in wound classification. In spite of clear guidelines prompting at least 'clean-contaminated' designation for HPB resections, 8% of all cases were coded as 'clean'. Contaminated [adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 1.39, P = 0.001] and dirty (AOR: 1.42, P = 0.02] cases were associated with higher odds of SSI, whereas clean-contaminated were not (P = 0.99). O/E ratios were highly sensitive to modest changes in wound classification. CONCLUSIONS: Perceived performance is affected by heterogeneous reporting of wound classification. As institutions work to improve outcomes and prepare for public reporting, it is imperative that all adhere to consistent reporting practices to provide accurate and reproducible outcomes.

Social Vulnerability Index and Survivorship after Colorectal Cancer Resection.

BACKGROUND: Race and socioeconomic status incompletely identify patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) at the highest risk for screening, treatment, and mortality disparities. Social vulnerability index (SVI) was designed to delineate neighborhoods requiring greater support after external health stressors, summarizing socioeconomic, household, and transportation barriers by census tract. SVI is implicated in lower cancer center use and increased complications after colectomy, but its influence on long-term prognosis is unknown. Herein, we characterized relationships between SVI and CRC survival. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing resection of stage I to IV CRC from January 2010 to May 2023 within an academic health system were identified. Clinicopathologic characteristics were abstracted using institutional National Cancer Database and NSQIP. Addresses from electronic health records were geocoded to SVI. Overall survival and cancer-specific survival were compared using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. RESULTS: A total of 872 patients were identified, comprising 573 (66%) patients with colon tumor and 299 (34%) with rectal tumor. Patients in the top SVI quartile (32%) were more likely to be Black (41% vs 13%, p < 0.001), carry less private insurance (39% vs 48%, p = 0.02), and experience greater comorbidity (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status III: 86% vs 71%, p < 0.001), without significant differences by acuity, stage, or CRC therapy. In multivariable analysis, high SVI remained associated with higher all-cause (hazard ratio 1.48, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.96, p < 0.01) and cancer-specific survival mortality (hazard ratio 1.71, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.67, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: High SVI was independently associated with poorer prognosis after CRC resection beyond the perioperative period. Acknowledging needs for multi-institutional evaluation and elaborating causal mechanisms, neighborhood-level vulnerability may inform targeted outreach in CRC care.