What Can an Aging Pouch Tell Us? Outcomes of Ileoanal Pouches Over 20 Years Old.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the long-term functional outcomes of restorative proctocolectomy. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine ileoanal pouch outcomes 20 and 30 years postoperatively. DESIGN: This is a retrospective case series. SETTING: This study was conducted at a tertiary care referral center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent restorative proctocolectomy between 1980 and 1994 were identified. Those with ≥20 years of in-person follow-up were included. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Pouch function, pouchitis, anal stricture, and pouch failure rates were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 203 patients had ≥20 years of follow-up. Of those, 71 had ≥30 years of follow-up. Initial diagnoses included ulcerative colitis (83%), indeterminate colitis (9%), familial adenomatous polyposis (4%), and Crohn's disease (3%). Twenty-one percent of those with ulcerative or indeterminate colitis later transitioned to Crohn's disease. Mean daily stool frequency was 7 (IQR 6-8), 38% experienced seepage, 31% had anal stenosis, 47% experienced pouchitis, and 18% had pouch failure. Over time, stool frequency increased in 41% of patients, stayed the same in 43%, and decreased in 16%. Patients older than 50 years at the time of construction had more daily bowel movements (median 8 vs 6; p = 0.02) and more seepage (77% vs 35%; p = 0.005) than those younger than 50 years. Patients with Crohn's disease had higher stool frequency (median 8 vs 6; p < 0.001) and higher rates of anal stenosis (44% vs 26%; p = 0.02), pouchitis (70% vs 40%; p < 0.001), and pouch failure (38% vs 12%; p < 0.001) compared to non-Crohn's patients. Patients with ≥30 years of follow-up had similar function as those with 20-30 years of follow-up. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective, single-institution study. Only 35% of pouches created during the study period had >20 years of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients maintain reasonably good function and retain their pouches after 20 years. Over time, stool frequency and seepage increase. Older age and Crohn's disease are associated with worse outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B801. QU NOS DICE UN RESERVORIO A LARGO PLAZO RESULTADOS DE LOS RESERVORIOS ILEOANALES MAYORES DE AOS: ANTECEDENTES:se sabe poco sobre los resultados funcionales a largo plazo de la proctocolectomía restauradora.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar los resultados del reservorio ileoanal 20 y 30 años después de la operación.DISEÑO:Serie de casos retrospectiva.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Centro de referencia de atención terciariaPACIENTES:Se identificaron pacientes que se sometieron a proctocolectomía restauradora entre 1980 y 1994. Se incluyeron aquellos con ≥20 años de seguimiento en persona.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Se analizaron la función, inflamación, tasas de falla del reservorio y estenosis anal.RESULTADOS:Un total de 203 pacientes tuvieron ≥20 años de seguimiento. De ellos, 71 tenían ≥30 años de seguimiento. Los diagnósticos iniciales incluyeron colitis ulcerosa (83%), colitis indeterminada (9%), poliposis adenomatosa familiar (4%) y enfermedad de Crohn (3%). El 21% de las personas con colitis ulcerosa o indeterminada pasaron posteriormente a la enfermedad de Crohn. La frecuencia promedio de las deposiciones diarias fue de 7 (rango intercuartil 6-8), el 38% experimentó filtración, el 31% tuvo estenosis anal, el 47% experimentó pouchitis y el 18% tuvo falla del reservorio. Con el tiempo, la frecuencia de las deposiciones aumentó en el 41% de los pacientes, se mantuvo igual en el 43% y disminuyó en el 16%. Los pacientes mayores de 50 años en el momento de la construcción tenían más evacuaciones intestinales diarias (media 8 vs 6, p = 0,02) y más filtraciones (77% vs 35%, p = 0,005) que los menores de 50 años. Los pacientes con enfermedad de Crohn tenían mayor frecuencia de deposiciones (media 8 vs 6, p < 0,001) y tasas más altas de estenosis anal (44% vs 26%, p = 0,02), inflamacion (70% vs 40%, p <0,001) y falla del reservorio (38% frente a 12%, p <0,001) en comparación con pacientes que tenian enfermedad de Crohn. Los pacientes con ≥30 años de seguimiento tuvieron una función similar a aquellos con 20-30 años de seguimiento.LIMITACIONES:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo de una sola institución. Solo el 35% de los reservorios creados durante el período de estudio tuvieron más de 20 años de seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes mantienen una función razonablemente buena y conservan el reservorio después de 20 años. Con el tiempo, la frecuencia de las deposiciones y la filtración aumentan. La vejez y la enfermedad de Crohn se asocian con peores resultados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B801. (Traducción - Dr. Ingrid Melo).

Should They Stay or Should They Go? The Utility of C-Reactive Protein in Predicting Readmission and Anastomotic Leak After Colorectal Resection.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission and anastomotic leak following colorectal resection have a negative impact on patients, surgeons, and the health care system. Novel markers of patients unlikely to experience these complications are of value in avoiding readmission. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the predictive value of C-reactive protein for readmission and anastomotic leak within 30 days following colorectal resection. DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of a prospectively compiled single-institution database. PATIENTS: From January 1, 2013, to July 20, 2017, consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal resection with anastomosis without the presence of proximal intestinal stoma, who had C-reactive protein measured on postoperative day 3, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the predictive value of C-reactive protein measured on postoperative day 3 for readmission or anastomotic leak within 30 days after colorectal resection. RESULTS: Of the 752 patients examined, 73 (10%) were readmitted within 30 days of surgery and 17 (2%) had an anastomotic leak. Mean C-reactive protein in patients who neither had an anastomotic leak nor were readmitted (127 ± 77 mg/L) was lower than for patients who were readmitted (157 ± 96 mg/L, p = 0.002) and lower than for patients who had an anastomotic leak (228 ± 123 mg/L, p = 0.0000002). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for the diagnostic accuracy of C-reactive protein for readmission was 0.59, with a cutoff value of 145 mg/L, generating a 93% negative predictive value. The area under the curve for the diagnostic accuracy of C-reactive protein for anastomotic leak was 0.76, with a cutoff value of 147 mg/L generating a 99% negative predictive value. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and because all patients were treated at a single center. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with a C-reactive protein below 145 mg/L on postoperative day 3 after colorectal resection have a low likelihood of readmission within 30 days, and a very low likelihood of anastomotic leak. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A761.

Quality Improvement Initiatives in Colorectal Surgery: Value of Physician Feedback.

BACKGROUND: The impact of process improvement through surgeon feedback on outcomes is unclear. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the effect of biannual surgeon-specific feedback on outcomes and adherence to departmental and Surgical Care Improvement Project process measures on colorectal surgery outcomes. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected 100% capture surgical quality improvement data. SETTING: This study was conducted at the department of colorectal surgery at a tertiary care teaching hospital from January 2008 through December 2013. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each surgeon was provided with biannual feedback on process adherence and surgeon-specific outcomes of urinary tract infection, deep vein thrombosis, surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, 30-day readmission, reoperation, and mortality. We recorded adherence to Surgical Care Improvement Project process measures and departmentally implemented measures (ie, anastomotic leak testing) as well as surgeon-specific outcomes. RESULTS: We abstracted 7975 operations. There was no difference in demographics, laparoscopy, or blood loss. Adherence to catheter removal increased from 73% to 100% (p < 0.0001), whereas urinary tract infection decreased 52% (p < 0.01). Adherence to thromboprophylaxis administration remained unchanged as did the deep vein thrombosis rate (p = not significant). Adherence to preoperative antibiotic administration increased from 72% to 100% (p < 0.0001), whereas surgical site infection did not change (7.6%-6.6%; p = 0.3). There were 2589 operative encounters with anastomoses. For right-sided anastomoses, the proportion of handsewn anastomoses declined from 19% to 1.5% (p < 0.001). For left-sided anastomoses, without diversion, anastomotic leak testing adherence increased from 88% to 95% (p < 0.01). Overall leak rate decreased from 5.2% to 2.9% (p < 0.05). LIMITATIONS: Concurrent process changes make isolation of the impact from individual process improvement changes challenging. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly complete adherence to process measures for deep vein thrombosis and surgical site infection did not lead to measureable outcomes improvement. Process measure adherence was associated with decreased rate of anastomotic leak and urinary tract infection. Biannual surgeon-specific feedback of outcomes was associated with improved process measure adherence and improvement in surgical quality.

Do Appendicitis and Diverticulitis Share a Common Pathological Link?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether there is an association between appendicitis and diverticulitis. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective cohort analysis. SETTING: This study was conducted in a subspecialty practice at a tertiary care facility. PATIENTS: We examined the rate of appendectomy among 4 cohorts of patients: 1) patients with incidentally identified diverticulosis on screening colonoscopy, 2) inpatients with medically treated diverticulitis, 3) patients who underwent left-sided colectomy for diverticulitis, and 4) patients who underwent colectomy for left-sided colorectal cancer. INTERVENTIONS: There were no interventions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the appendectomy rate. RESULTS: We studied a total of 928 patients in this study. There were no differences in the patient characteristics of smoking status, nonsteroidal use, or history of irritable bowel syndrome across the 4 study groups. Patients with surgically treated diverticulitis had significantly more episodes of diverticulitis (2.8 ± 1.9) than the medically treated group (1.4 ± 0.8) (p < 0.0001). The rate of appendectomy was 8.2% for the diverticulosis control group, 13.5% in the cancer group, 23.5% in the medically treated diverticulitis group, and 24.5% in the surgically treated diverticulitis group (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for demographics and other clinical risk factors, patients with diverticulitis had 2.8 times higher odds of previous appendectomy (p < 0.001) than the control groups. LIMITATIONS: The retrospective study design is associated with selection, documentation, and recall bias. CONCLUSIONS: Our data reveal significantly higher appendectomy rates in patients with a diagnosis of diverticulitis, medically or surgically managed, in comparison with patients with incidentally identified diverticulosis. Therefore, we propose that appendicitis and diverticulitis share similar risk factors and potentially a common pathological link.

Do patient safety indicators explain increased weekend mortality?

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the differential role of patient safety indicator (PSI) events on mortality after weekend as compared with weekday admission. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality PSI events within a cohort of patients with nonelective admissions. First, we identified all patients with a PSI based on day of admission (weekend versus weekday). Then, we evaluated the outcome of mortality after each PSI event. Finally, we entered age, sex, race, median household income, payer information, and Charlson comorbidity scores in regression models to develop risk ratios of weekend to weekday PSI events and mortality. RESULTS: There were 28,236,749 patients evaluated with 428,685 (1.5%) experiencing one or more PSI events. The rate of PSI was the same for patients admitted on weekends as compared to weekdays (1.5%). However, the risk of mortality was 7% higher if a PSI event occurred to a patient admitted on a weekend as compared with a weekday. In addition, compared to patients admitted on weekdays, patients admitted on weekends had a 36% higher risk of postoperative wound dehiscence, 19% greater risk of death in a low-mortality diagnostic-related group, 19% increased risk of postoperative hip fracture, and 8% elevated risk of surgical inpatient death. CONCLUSIONS: Risk adjusted data reveal that PSI events are substantially higher among patients admitted on weekends. The considerable differences in death after PSI events in patients admitted on weekends as compared with weekdays indicate that responses to adverse events may be less effective on weekends.

Epidemiologic Analysis of Diverticulitis.

The aim of this article is to evaluate geographic variation in the incidence of diverticulitis and examine behavioral and environmental factors associated with high rates of diverticulitis across the United States. We used state hospital discharge data from 20 states to determine rates of inpatient diverticulitis from January 2002 to December 2004 at patient's county of residence. Next, we merged the county level data with behavioral and environmental survey data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS). Finally, we determined the association between behavioral and environmental factors (i.e., teeth removal, dental cleaning, air quality, smoking, alcohol, vaccine, vitamins, and mental health) and high rates of diverticulitis. From January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2004, a total of 345,216 hospitalizations for acute diverticulitis were recorded for 1,055 counties. We identified rates of diverticulitis that ranged from 35.4 to 332.7 per 100,000 population. On univariate analysis, high diverticulitis burden was associated with regions of the country with substantial tooth loss from dental disease (45.8% for high diverticulitis counties vs. 37.5% for low diverticulitis counties; p = 0.0001). There is considerable variability in diverticulitis cases by county of residence across the nation. Potential triggers of diverticulitis may be associated with tooth removal and sun exposure.

What are the results of colonic volvulus surgery?

BACKGROUND: Operative results of volvulus are largely unknown because of infrequent diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: We examined the results of operative intervention for colonic volvulus. DESIGN: We merged trackable data from the California Inpatient Database with Supplemental Files for Revisit Analyses between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2007. SETTINGS: Trackable data from California discharge records. PATIENTS: We identified all of the patients with colonic volvulus who underwent 1 of 4 surgical procedures, including manipulation/fixation of the colon, right colectomy, left colectomy, or total colectomy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: During the 36-month study period, we identified recurrence risk, recurrence requiring reoperation, time to reoperation, stoma formation, disposition on discharge, and in-hospital mortality. Fisher exact, χ(2), and ANOVA tests were used when appropriate. RESULTS: We identified 2141 patients with colonic volvulus who were undergoing intraoperative manipulation/fixation of the colon (n = 209 (12%)), right (n = 728 (41%)), left (n = 781 (44%)), or total colectomy (n = 56 (3%)). Patients treated with intraoperative manipulation/fixation were younger, more likely to be women, and more likely to have private insurance. Patients who underwent total colectomy had the highest risk of mortality (21%), highest risk of stoma creation (64%), and longest length of stay (18 days); were more likely to be readmitted (9%); and were the most likely to be discharged to a skilled nursing facility (48%). Patients treated with intraoperative manipulation/fixation had the lowest mortality, risk of stoma formation, length of stay, and likelihood of discharge to skilled nursing facility but the highest risk of subsequent procedures for volvulus (26%) over a follow-up ranging from 0 to 687 days. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by retrospective study design, heterogeneous patient factors, and inability to identify the time of last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients with volvulus underwent a resectional procedure. A subset without resection had favorable initial outcomes but remained at high risk for subsequent procedures. There may be a potential role for evaluating intraoperative manipulation/fixation in a small subset of patients with colonic volvulus.

Can the national surgical quality improvement program provide surgeon-specific outcomes?

BACKGROUND: Efforts to improve the quality of surgical care and reduce morbidity and mortality have resulted in outcomes reporting at the service and institutional level. Surgeon-specific outcomes are not readily available. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to compare surgeon-specific outcomes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and 100% capture institutional quality data. DESIGN: We conducted a cohort study evaluating institutional and surgeon-specific outcomes following colorectal surgery procedures at 1 institution over 5 years. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent an operation by a colorectal surgeon at Lahey Hospital & Medical Center from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2012 were identified. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thirty-day mortality, reoperation, urinary tract infection, deep vein thrombosis, pneumonia, superficial surgical site infection, and organ space infection were the primary outcomes measured. ANALYSIS: We compared annual and 5-year institutional and surgeon-specific adverse event rates between the data sets. In addition, we categorized individual surgeons as low-outlier, average, or high-outlier in relation to aggregate averages and determined the concordance between the data sets in identifying outliers. Concordance was designated if the 2 databases classified outlier status similarly for the same adverse event category. RESULTS: In the 100% capture institutional data, 6459 operative encounters were identified in comparison with 1786 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program encounters (28% sampled). Annual aggregate adverse event rates were similar between the institutional data and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. For annual surgeon-specific comparisons, concordance in identifying outliers between the 2 data sets was 51.4%, and gross discordance between outlier status was in 8.2%. Five-year surgeon-specific comparisons demonstrated 59% concordance in identifying outlier status with 8.2% gross discordance for the group. LIMITATIONS: The inclusion of data from only 1 academic referral center is a limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Each surgeon was identified as a "high outlier" in at least 1 adverse event category. Comparisons at the annual and 5-year points demonstrated poor concordance between our 100% capture institutional data and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data.

All things not being equal: readmission associated with procedure type.

BACKGROUND: There is an accelerated effort to reduce hospital readmissions despite minimal data detailing risk factors associated with this outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyzed National Surgical Quality Improvement Project data from January 1, 2011-December 31, 2011, evaluating all patients undergoing one of 34 targeted operative procedures across all surgical specialties. Multivariate regression models of risk for readmission were developed including targeted procedure codes, demographic variables, preoperative variables, intraoperative variables, and postoperative adverse events. Our main outcome measure was hospital readmission. RESULTS: A total of 217, 389 patients met study inclusion criteria. Minimal associations existed between patient factors and risk of readmission. Adverse events including unplanned operating room return (odds ratio [OR] 8.5; confidence interval [CI] 8.0-9.0), pulmonary embolism (OR 8.2; CI 7.1-9.6), deep incisional infection (OR 7.5; CI 6.7-8.5), and organ space infection (OR 5.8; CI 5.3-6.3) were associated with increased risk of readmission. Our data suggest the type of procedure performed is significantly associated with risk of readmission. Furthermore, multivariate analysis revealed procedures, involving the pancreas, rectum, bladder, and lower extremity vascular bypass, were associated with the highest risk of readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative complications demonstrated stronger association with readmission than patient factors. Focused analysis of higher risk procedures may provide insight into strategies for risk reduction.

Is there a gain in chromosome 3q in the pathway to anal cancer?

BACKGROUND: Chromosome 3q gain has been identified in human papillomavirus-infected cervical cancer cells. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify the presence of chromosomal 3q gain in anal neoplasia. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a group colorectal surgery practice. PATIENTS: Fifty-two patients with no dysplasia, low-grade dysplasia, high-grade dysplasia, or anal cancer were studied. INTERVENTIONS: Pairs of biopsy specimens were paraffin embedded and reviewed. One of each slide pair was stained with hematoxylin and eosin and the second processed for fluorescence in situ hybridization. The hybridized set was deparaffinized first and then hybridized with a probe for the chromosome 3q26 region. Then, slides were scanned using an automated fluorescence microscopy system that analyzed defined areas of the tissue to enumerate all of the nuclei for hybridized probe signals to detect chromosome 3q gain. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured for gain in chromosome 3q26. RESULTS: We identified chromosome 3q gain in 7 (78%) of 9 patients with squamous-cell cancer, 8 (53%) of 15 high-grade dysplasia samples, 0 of 12 low-grade dysplasia samples, and 0 of 16 samples with no dysplasia. The sensitivity for high-grade or invasive neoplasia was 58%, with a specificity of 100%. The positive predictive value of the test was 100% for detecting high-grade dysplasia and/or squamous-cell cancer from no dysplasia, and the negative predictive value of the test was 62%. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its small sample size and retrospective design. CONCLUSIONS: Chromosome 3q gain represents an important shared pathway to tumorigenesis in cervical and anal neoplasia. Multiple potential diagnostic roles exist for this easily performed test in the evaluation of anal neoplasia.

Is patient diagnosis a risk factor for organ space infection after colorectal resections?

BACKGROUND: Validated risk adjustment programs do not use patient diagnosis as a potential covariate in the evaluation of organ space infections. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that patient diagnosis is an important risk factor for organ space infection after colorectal resections. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study abstracting data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from January 2005 through December 2009. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent 1 of 3 types of colorectal resections (ileocolostomy, partial colectomy, and coloproctostomy) were identified by the use of Current Procedural Terminology codes. We excluded patients with concomitant formation of diverting or end stoma. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was organ space infection. ANALYSIS: Validated risk adjustment models were used with the addition of diagnostic codes. RESULTS: We identified 52,056 patients who underwent a colorectal resection of whom 1774 patients developed an organ space infection (3.4%) and 894 (50.2%) returned to the operating room for further surgery. For ileocolostomy, operations for endometriosis (OR, 7.8; 95% CI, 1.7-36.6) and intra-abdominal fistula surgery (OR, 3.0; 95% CI, 1.5-6.0) were associated with increased risk of organ space infection. For partial colectomy, operations for intra-abdominal fistula surgery (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.2-4.3), IBD (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.6-3.8), and bowel obstruction (OR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.2-2.6) were associated with an increased risk of organ space infection. For coloproctostomy, operations for malignant neoplasm (OR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.1-4.3) and diverticular bleeding (OR, 3.1; 95% CI, 1.1-9.0) were associated with an increased risk of organ space infection. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for National Surgical Quality Improvement Program covariates, intra-abdominal fistula, endometriosis, and diverticular bleeding were the diagnoses associated with the highest risk of organ space infection following colorectal resections.

Is the presence of medical trainees associated with increased mortality with weekend admission?

BACKGROUND: Several studies have demonstrated increased inhospital mortality following weekend admission. We hypothesized that the presence of resident trainees reduces the weekend mortality trends. METHODS: We identified all patients with a non-elective hospital admission from 1/1/2003 through 12/31/2008. We abstracted vital status on discharge and calculated the Charlson comorbidity score for all inpatients. We compared odds of inpatient mortality following non-elective admission on a weekend day as compared to a weekday, while considering diagnosis, patient characteristics, comorbidity, hospital factors, and care at hospitals with resident trainees. RESULTS: Data were available for 48,253,968 patient discharges during the six-year study period. The relative risk of mortality was 15% higher following weekend admission as compared to weekday admission. After adjusting for diagnosis, age, sex, race, income level, payer, comorbidity, and weekend admission the overall odds of mortality was higher for patients in hospitals with fewer nurses and staff physicians. Mortality following a weekend admission for patients admitted to a hospital with resident trainees was significantly higher (17%) than hospitals with no resident trainees (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Low staffing levels of nurses and physicians significantly impact mortality on weekends following non-elective admission. Conversely, patients admitted to hospitals with more resident trainees had significantly higher mortality following a weekend admission.

Complications after rectal prolapse surgery: does approach matter?

BACKGROUND: Data comparing surgical outcomes following abdominal and transperineal approaches for rectal prolapse are limited. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify differences in postoperative complications following abdominal vs transperineal approaches to rectal prolapse. DESIGN: We studied a retrospective cohort in the American College of Surgeon's National Surgical Quality Improvement Program from January 2005 through December 2008. PATIENTS: We identified all patients who underwent surgical treatment for rectal prolapse. INTERVENTION: We compared surgical outcomes of standard abdominal approaches compared with standard transperineal approaches to rectal prolapse. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the validated morbidity outcomes and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: During the study period, 1485 patients underwent rectal prolapse surgery (706 abdominal and 779 transperineal). Patients treated with abdominal approaches had significantly higher rates of infectious (9.8% vs 3.7%) and overall (12.9% vs 7.6%) complications in comparison with those treated with transperineal approaches. On multivariate analysis, risk factors for overall complications were ASA class 4 (OR 6.4) and abdominal surgery (OR 2.3), whereas an albumin level of ≥ 2.5 was protective (OR 0.05). Significant predictors of infectious complications were ASA class 4 (OR 7.5), BMI >25 (OR 1.8), and rectal prolapse surgery performed with an abdominal approach (OR 2.8). LIMITATIONS: The retrospective design introduces potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Abdominal surgery for rectal prolapse is a predictor of both infectious and overall complications. Patients with significant comorbidities or a high BMI are at particularly high risk for complications and may be better suited for a transperineal rather than abdominal approach for the treatment of rectal prolapse.

Identification of consensus-based quality end points for colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Process and outcome measures for quality assessment of colorectal surgical care are poorly defined. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop candidate end points for use in surgeon-specific registries designed for case reporting and quality improvement program development. DESIGN: The study design was based on modified Delphi-based development of consensus quality end points. SETTING: This study was undertaken by the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Executive Council, Quality Committee, and by the ColoRectal Education System Template Committee, American Board of Colon and Rectal Surgery. PATIENTS: No patients were included in this study. INTERVENTIONS: Six areas of colorectal surgery were defined by members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons' Executive Council and the American Board of Colon and Rectal Surgery to cover areas of importance for colorectal surgeons. These included colectomy, rectal cancer, hemorrhoidectomy, anal fistula and abscess, colonoscopy, and rectal prolapse. Relevant American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons' committee members through a series of 4 panel discussions identified important demographic, process, and outcome measures in each of these 6 areas that might be suitable for the American College of Surgeons case log. Panel size was sequentially expanded from 8 members to 28 members to include all active committee members. Panelists contributed additional process and outcome measures for inclusion during each discussion. Modified Delphi methodology was used to generate consensus, and, after each panel discussion, members rated the relative importance of each end point from 1 (least important) to 4 (most important). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The mean rating for each process and outcome measure after each round was recorded with the use of standardized definitions for relevant variables. RESULTS: Eighty-nine process and outcome measures were compiled and rated. Mean scores following the final round ranged from a low of 1.3 (anal fistula/abscess, preoperative imaging) to a high of 4.0 (colectomy-anastomotic leak). LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this study involved the use of consensus, small study size, and the fact that no end points were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: With the use of modified Delphi methodology, a consensus-derived ranked list of 89 process and outcome measures was developed in 6 key areas of colorectal surgery. These data provide a framework for development of guideline standards for case-reporting program development initiatives for colon and rectal surgery.

The american board of colon and rectal surgery: past, present, and future.

Since the incorporation of the American Board of Proctology, development and refinement of the process of board certification has been a critical part of the establishment and growth of the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. Continued commitment to the process begun by the early pioneers of this field provides quality practitioners not only when initially trained, but increasingly throughout the continuum of each diplomate's professional career. Board certification and maintenance of certification are the most tangible examples of our commitment to our patients and the public.

Horseshoe Fistulae in the Age of LIFT.

BACKGROUND: Horseshoe fistula is a challenging benign anorectal condition to treat. The aim of this study was to assess the utilization and success of different definitive fistula repair techniques in the treatment of horseshoe fistula. METHODS: This was a retrospective case series which included all patients who were treated for horseshoe fistula from 2006 to 2019 at a single, tertiary care center and whom had at least one follow-up visit. Patients were excluded if < 18 years of age or carried a diagnosis of Crohn's disease. Patients were assessed for fistula recurrence and incontinence. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients were identified. On average, they were 47 years old, 63% male, and 18% current smokers. Seventy-nine percent required seton during their treatment course. Of the 8 first attempts at fistula repair, the types of repair included flap (15%), LIFT (35%), fistulotomy (31%), plug (12%), and fistulotomy and immediate reconstruction (1%). Recurrence for these procedures was as follows: flap 30%, LIFT 21%, fistulotomy 14%, plug 88%, and fistulotomy and immediate reconstruction 0%. Twelve patients who recurred underwent 17 additional procedures to attempt to cure their fistula. Overall, of those who underwent any attempt at definitive repair, 82% of patients were cured of their fistula, 12% had a chronic seton, and 6% had a chronic fistula. Thirteen percent of those who were cured had incontinence. The mean follow-up time was 1.1 years. Patients required a median of 3 procedures (range 1-11). CONCLUSION: Horseshoe fistula remains a complex anorectal condition. Successful repair can be performed in > 80% of patients. However, repair can often require multiple surgical procedures.

Long-term follow-up after an initial episode of diverticulitis: what are the predictors of recurrence?

PURPOSE: The purpose of our study was to determine the clinical and CT predictors of recurrent disease after a first episode of diverticulitis that was successfully managed nonoperatively. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 954 consecutive patients who presented to our institution with diverticulitis from 2002 to 2008. Patients were identified with International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision/Current Procedural Terminology codes. Patients were excluded if they had subsequent colectomy based on the first attack (n = 81), or if the attack they had between 2002 and 2008 was not their first attack (n = 201). We evaluated CT variables chosen by a panel of expert gastrointestinal radiologists. These radiologists reviewed the available published literature for CT imaging characteristics thought to predict diverticulitis severity. CT variables (n = 20) were determined by prospective reevaluation of scans by blinded study radiologists. Clinical variables (n = 43) were coded based on a retrospective chart review. Univariate analysis of variables in relation to recurrent disease was performed by a log-rank test of Kaplan-Meier estimates. Multivariate analysis was performed using Cox proportional hazards modeling. Variables with P < .2 on univariate analysis were included in a stepwise selection algorithm. RESULTS: The study population included 672 patients; mean age, 61 ± 15 years; mean follow-up, 42.8 ± 24 months. The index presentation of diverticulitis was most commonly located in the sigmoid colon (72%), followed by descending colon (33%), right colon (5%), and transverse colon (3%). Overall recurrence at 5 years was 36% by (95% CI 31.4%-40.6%) Kaplan-Meier estimate. Complicated recurrence (fistula, abscess, free perforation) occurred in 3.9% (95% CI 2.2%-5.6%) of patients at 5 years by Kaplan-Meier estimate. Family history of diverticulitis (HR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.2), length of involved colon >5 cm (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.3-2.3), and retroperitoneal abscess (HR 4.5, 95% CI 1.1-18.4) were associated with diverticulitis recurrence. Right colon disease (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.86) was associated with freedom from recurrence. CONCLUSION: Although diverticulitis recurrence is common following an initial attack that has been managed medically, complicated recurrence is uncommon. Patients who present with a family history of diverticulitis, long segment of involved colon, and/or retroperitoneal abscess are at higher risk for recurrent disease. Patients who present with right-sided diverticulitis are at low risk for recurrent disease. These findings should be taken into consideration when counseling patients regarding the potential benefits of prophylactic colectomy.

Presence of specialty surgeons reduces the likelihood of colostomy after proctectomy for rectal cancer.

PURPOSE: Geographic variability in the use of restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer has been described throughout the United States. We examined factors associated with high rates of colostomy formation after proctectomy for rectal cancer across US counties. METHODS: We used state hospital discharge data from 21 states to determine county rates of restorative proctectomy vs nonrestorative proctectomy (ie, colostomy) for rectal cancer. We merged the county-level data with 1) tumor characteristics from Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data; 2) number of specialty surgeons in the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and Society of Surgical Oncology; 3) county socioeconomic variables from census data; 4) colorectal cancer-screening rates from Medicare; and 5) hospital characteristics from the American Hospital Association. We then determined factors associated with high rates of colostomy formation (> 60%) after proctectomy for rectal cancer across counties. RESULTS: From January 1, 2002, to December 31, 2004, a total of 19,912 proctectomies were performed for cancer in 1050 counties, of which 489 had adequate sample size for evaluation. Based on county of residence information, nonrestorative proctectomy with colostomy was performed in greater than 60% of all patients with rectal cancer in 26% (n = 125) of counties. On multivariate analysis, more specialty surgeons (OR = 0.70; CI = 0.51-0.96) were protective against colostomy formation at the county level. CONCLUSIONS: The use of restorative techniques in rectal cancer surgery varies based on access to specialty colorectal cancer surgeons. Population-based directives are needed to standardize care for rectal cancer across the United States.

Who performs proctectomy for rectal cancer in the United States?

BACKGROUND: There is wide variation in surgical care for rectal cancer in the United States. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the differences in individual surgeon procedural profiles that might explain variations in the rates of restorative vs nonrestorative proctectomy for rectal cancer. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective examination of a cohort derived from trackable state hospital discharge data from 11 states. PATIENTS: We identified all patients with rectal cancer that underwent restorative proctectomy (sphincter-sparing surgery) vs nonrestorative proctectomy (colostomy formation) over a 24-month study period (January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2004). INTERVENTION: We developed an inpatient procedural profile of each treating surgeon's practice across general surgery procedure codes and summed the number of restorative vs nonrestorative proctectomies for rectal cancer by surgeon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures were nonrestorative proctectomy, mortality, and length of stay. RESULTS: A total of 7519 proctectomies were performed for rectal cancer by 2588 surgeons. During the 24-month study period, 1003 (38.8%) surgeons performed only nonrestorative procedures for rectal cancer. On multivariate analysis, the likelihood that a surgeon performed only nonrestorative procedures was increased if that surgeon performed more integumentary procedures and decreased if the surgeon performed at least one ileoanal pouch procedure or more anorectal procedures. Patients who underwent proctectomy by surgeons who performed only nonrestorative procedures had significantly higher mortality (2.5 ± 0.7%) and longer length of stay (11.3 ± 8.8 days) in comparison with those patients treated by surgeons who performed both restorative and nonrestorative procedures (1.3 ± 0.3% mortality and 9.2 ± 6.9 days, P < .001 for both analyses). The volume of proctectomy performed significantly affected all analyses. LIMITATIONS: : The retrospective design introduces potential selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Over a 24-month period, 38.8% of surgeons performed only nonrestorative procedures for rectal cancer. These surgeons did not regularly perform anorectal or ileoanal pouch procedures, suggesting that they may not have a focus on colorectal disease in their practice; they had significantly higher mortality and length of stay for their patients who underwent proctectomy for rectal cancer.

How to Get Ahead: Early-Career Colorectal Surgeons Reflect on Their First Few Years in Practice.

OBJECTIVE: To identify strategies and barriers to career progression in early-career colorectal surgeons. DESIGN: Qualitative research study performed via semi-structured interviews with early-career, board-certified colon, and rectal surgeons. Responses were analyzed, coded, and categorized to understand strategies towards career progression, perceived barriers to career progression, beliefs about case mix, and referral patterns. SETTING: Interviews conducted in person and via telephone across the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Early-career board-certified colorectal surgeons RESULTS: Twenty-two board-certified colorectal surgeons currently employed in 14 states and 1 foreign country were interviewed. Fourty-five percent were female. Their current practice environment was described as academic (77%), private practice (18%), or military (5%). Seventy-seven percent of surgeons were satisfied with their career progression. Seventy-two percent were satisfied with the case volume. Seventy-two percent were satisfied with their case mix. When asked about strategies for career progression, surgeons made 77 comments focused on three main themes: optimization of their job search, optimization of relationships while on the job, and efforts to augment individual achievement. When asked about barriers to career advancement, surgeons most frequently commented on a lack of time and a lack of mentors. When asked about case mix, 63% of surgeons felt that they had no control over it. They were evenly divided between believing that a broad case mix or a niche specialized case mix was more instrumental for career progression. CONCLUSIONS: Early-career colorectal surgeons were mostly satisfied with their career progression, volume, and case mix. In discussing their careers, many have developed a number of strategies focused on growth as an individual as well as relationship building. They also identified a number of barriers including lack of time and lack of mentorship. Early-career surgeons may be able to utilize these strategies and anticipate barriers prior to starting their first job, leading to greater likelihood of career satisfaction.