Operative Incision and Drainage for Perirectal Abscesses: What Are Risk Factors for Prolonged Length of Stay, Reoperation, and Readmission?

BACKGROUND: Perirectal abscess is a common problem. Despite a seemingly simple disease to manage, clinical outcomes of perirectal abscesses can vary significantly given the wide array of patients who are susceptible to this disease. OBJECTIVE: Our aims were to evaluate the outcomes after operative incision and drainage for perirectal abscess and to examine factors associated with length of stay, reoperations, and readmissions. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted with hospitals participating in the surgical database. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing outpatient perirectal abscess procedures from 2011 through 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Study outcomes were length of stay, reoperation, and readmission. RESULTS: We identified 2358 patients undergoing incision and drainage for perirectal abscesses. Approximately 35% of patients required hospital stay. Reoperations occurred in 3.4%, with median time to reoperation of 15.5 days. The majority of reoperations (79.7%) were performed for additional incision and drainage. Readmissions rate was 3.0%, with median time to readmission of 10.5 days. Common indications for readmissions included recurrent/persistent abscess (41.4%) and fever/sepsis (8.6%). Risk factors for hospitalization in multivariable analysis were preoperative sepsis, bleeding disorder, and non-Hispanic black and Hispanic races. For reoperations, risk factors included morbid obesity, preoperative sepsis, and dependent functional status. Lastly, for readmissions, female sex, steroid/immunosuppression, and dependent functional status were significant risk factors. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective analysis and potential selection bias in decisions on hospital stay, reoperation, and readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal outcomes after outpatient operative incision and drainage for perirectal abscesses are not uncommon in the United States. In the era of value-based care, additional work is needed to optimize use outcomes for high-risk patients undergoing perirectal incision and drainage. Strategies to prevent inadequate drainage at the time of the initial operative incision and drainage (ie, use of imaging modalities and thorough examination under anesthesia) are warranted to improve patient outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B229. INCISIÓN Y DRENAJE QUIRÚRGICOS DE ABSCESOS PERIRRECTALES: CUALES SON LOS FACTORES DE RIESGO PARA UNA ESTADÍA PROLONGADA, REINTERVENCIÓN Y READMISION?: Los abscesos perirrectales son un problema frecuente. A pesar que parecen ser una afección aparentemente simple de manejar, los resultados clínicos de la incisión y drenaje quirúrgicos pueden variar significativamente dada la amplia variedad de pacientes susceptibles de sufrir esta afección.Evaluar los resultados después de la incisión y el drenaje quirúrgicos de un absceso perirrectal y analizar los factores asociados con la duración de la hospitalización, la reoperación y la readmisión.Análisis retrospectivo de la base de datos del Programa Americano de Mejora de la Calidad Quirúrgica.Hospitales que participan en la base de datos quirúrgica.Pacientes adultos sometidos a incisión y drenaje quirúrgico ambulatorio de un absceso perirrectal desde 2011 hasta 2016.Los resultados del estudio fueron la duración de la hospitalización, la reoperación y el reingreso.Fueron estudiados 2,358 pacientes sometidos a incisión y drenaje por abscesos perirrectales. Aproximadamente el 35% de los pacientes requirieron hospitalización. Las reoperaciones ocurrieron en 3.4% con una mediana de tiempo de reoperación de 15.5 días. La mayoría de las reoperaciones (79.7%) se realizaron para una incisión y drenaje adicionales. La tasa de reingreso fue del 3.0% con una mediana de tiempo de reingreso de 10.5 días. Las indicaciones comunes para los reingresos incluyeron abscesos recurrentes / persistentes (41.4%) y fiebre / sepsis (8.6%). Los factores de riesgo para la hospitalización en el análisis multivariable fueron sepsis preoperatoria, trastorno hemorrágico, raza negra no hispánica y raza hispana. Para las reoperaciones, los factores de riesgo incluyeron obesidad mórbida, sepsis preoperatoria y estado funcional dependiente. Por último, para los reingresos, el sexo femenino, uso de corticoides / inmunosupresores y un estadío funcional dependiente fueron factores de riesgo significativos.Análisis retrospectivo y posible sesgo de selección en las decisiones sobre hospitalización, reoperación y reingreso.Un resultado poco satisfactorio después de la incisión quirúrgica el drenaje de abscesos perirrectales ambulatoriamente no son infrecuentes en los Estados Unidos. En la era de la atención basada en los resultados, se necesita mucho más trabajo para optimizar los mismos en pacientes de alto riesgo sometidos a incisión y drenaje perirrectales. Las estrategias para prevenir el drenaje inadecuado en el momento de la incisión quirúrgica inicial y el drenaje (es decir, el uso de modalidades de imágenes, un examen completo bajo anestesia) son una garantía para mejorar los resultados en estos pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B229.

Assessing the Quality of Rectal Cancer Pathology Reports in National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-04/NRG Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Accurate and comprehensive surgical pathology reports are integral to the quality of cancer care. Despite guidelines from the College of American Pathologists, variations in reporting quality continue to exist. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of rectal cancer pathology reports and to identify areas of deficiency and potential sources of reporting variations. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively obtained pathology reports. SETTING: This study is based at the hospitals participating in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-04 study. PATIENTS: Patients with rectal cancer undergoing surgical resection between July 2004 and August 2010 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the adherence to the College of American Pathologists guidelines and the impact of synoptic reporting, academic status, rural/urban setting, and hospital bed size on reporting quality. RESULTS: We identified 1004 surgical pathology reports for rectal cancer surgery from 383 hospitals and 755 pathologists. The overall adherence rate to the College of American Pathologists guidelines was 73.3%. Notable reporting deficiencies were found in several key pathology characteristics, including tumor histologic grade (reporting rate 77.8%), radial margin (84.6%), distance from the closest margin (47.9%), treatment effect (47.1%), and lymphovascular (73.1%)/perineural invasions (35.4%). Synoptic reporting use and urban hospital settings were associated with better adherence rates, whereas academic status and hospital bed size had no impact. Reporting variations existed not only between institutions, but also within individual hospitals and pathologists. There was a trend for improved adherence over time (2005 = 65.7% vs 2010 = 82.3%, p < 0.001), which coincided with the increased adoption of synoptic reporting by pathologists (2005 vs 2010, 9.4% vs 25.3%, p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Data were obtained from a restricted setting (ie, hospitals participating in a randomized clinical trial). CONCLUSIONS: Wide variations in the quality of pathology reporting are observed for rectal cancer. The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer mandates that programs meet strict quality standards for surgical pathology reporting. Further improvement is needed in this key aspect of oncology care for patients with rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B238.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT00058 EVALUACIÓN DE LA CALIDAD DE LOS INFORMES DE PATOLOGÍA QUIRÚRGICA EN CASOS DE CÁNCER DE RECTO DEL NSABP R-04/ ONCOLOGÍA DEL NRG: Un informe de patología quirúrgica preciso y completo es fundamental en la calidad de atención de pacientes con cáncer. A pesar de las normas establecidas por el Colegio Americano de Patología, la variabilidad en la calidad de los informes es evidente.Evaluar la calidad de los informes de patología en casos de cáncer de recto para así identificar las áreas con deficiencias y las posibles fuentes variables en los mencionados informes.Análisis retrospectivo de informes de patología quirúrgica obtenidos prospectivamente.Hospitales que participan del Protocolo del Estudio Nacional R-04 como Adyuvantes Quirúrgicos de Mama e Intestino.Todos aquellos pacientes con cáncer de recto sometidos a resección quirúrgica entre Julio 2004 y Agosto 2010.Cumplimiento de las normas del Colegio Americano de Patología, del impacto de los informes sinópticos, del estado académico, del entorno rural / urbano y el número de camas hospitalarias en en la calidad de los informes.Identificamos 1,004 informes de patología quirúrgica en casos de cirugía en cáncer de recto en 383 hospitales y 755 patólogos. La tasa general de adherencia a las directivas del Colegio Americano de Patología fue del 73.3%. Se encontraron deficiencias notables en los informes en varias características patológicas clave incluidos, el grado histológico del tumor (tasa de informe 77.8%), margenes radiales (84.6%), distancia del margen más cercano (47.9%), efecto del tratamiento (47.1%) invasión linfovascular (73.1 %) / invasion perineural (35.4%). El uso de informes sinópticos y los entornos hospitalarios urbanos se asociaron con mejores tasas de adherencia, mientras que el estado académico y el número de camas hospitalarias no tuvieron ningún impacto. Hubo variaciones en los informes no solo entre instituciones, sino también dentro de hospitales y patólogos individuales. Hubo una tendencia a una mejor adherencia a lo largo del tiempo (2005 = 65.7% v 2010 = 82.3%, p < 0.001), que coincidió con la mayor adopción de informes sinópticos por parte de los patólogos (2005 v 2010, 9.4% v 25.3%, p < 0.001)Datos obtenidos de un entorno restringido (es decir, hospitales que participan en un ensayo clínico aleatorizado).Se observaron grandes variaciones en la calidad de los informes de patología quirúrgica en casos de cáncer de recto. El Programa Nacional de Acreditación para Cáncer de Recto exige que los programas cumplan con estrictos estándares de calidad para los informes de patología quirúrgica. Se necesita una mejoría adicional en este aspecto clave de la atención oncológica para pacientes con cáncer de recto. Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B238.Registro de Clinical Trials.gov: NCT00058.

Colonic Stenting for Nonmalignant Large Bowel Obstruction to Avoid Emergency Decompressive Surgery.

Self-expanding metallic stents (SEMSs) are frequently used to decompress malignant large bowel obstruction (LBO) and avoid emergent surgery with often permanent colostomy creation. However, limited data are available on the use and outcomes of SEMS in patients with nonmalignant LBO. We present a case series of 4 patients who were found to have nonmalignant LBO for which they underwent emergent colonic stenting as a bridge to elective surgery following interdisciplinary discussion between gastroenterology, colorectal surgery, and radiology. Through each patient vignette, we illustrate the use of SEMSs as a potential alternative to emergent surgery. 2 of 4 patients avoided stoma creation at the time of surgery, and 1 patient avoided surgery altogether; overall, however, the outcomes of this approach were mixed in this series, indicating a need for further investigation to better identify the patient population that would benefit most from initial SEMS placement for decompression of nonmalignant LBO.

Clear cap-assisted luminal stenting may improve technical success in gastroduodenal and colonic obstruction.

Background Luminal stenting is safe, effective, and at times the preferred method for relieving gastrointestinal obstruction. However, stent placement is not technically feasible when lesions cannot be traversed with a guidewire, resulting in the need for more invasive methods of palliation and urgent/emergent surgical intervention. In this series, we report our experience with cap-assisted stenting to improve lumen visualization in obstructed segments of the gastrointestinal tract and salvage cases that may have otherwise resulted in technical failure. Methods A clear cap (i. e. distal attachment) was affixed to the scope tip to facilitate visualization and stenting in two cases of gastroduodenal obstruction and three cases of colonic obstruction. Indications for stent placement included malignant obstruction, diverticulitis-associated obstruction, and Crohn's disease-associated stricture. Results In this report, we demonstrate that use of a clear cap facilitated endoscopic stenting in challenging cases of malignant and benign gastroduodenal and colonic obstruction. Conclusions A clear cap for endoscopic stenting can be used in cases in which standard techniques are unsuccessful or those anticipated to be technically difficult at the outset. Cases with tortuous anatomy or particularly tight, friable, or exophytic obstructive lesions may benefit most from this novel technical modification.