Predictors of En Bloc, R0 Resection, and Postprocedural Complications After Advanced Endoscopic Resections for Colorectal Neoplasms: Results of 1213 Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Advanced endoscopic resection techniques are used to treat colorectal neoplasms that are not amenable to conventional colonoscopic resection. Literature regarding the predictors of the outcomes of advanced endoscopic resections, especially from a colorectal surgical unit, is limited. OBJECTIVE: To determine the predictors of short-term and long-term outcomes after advanced endoscopic resections. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTINGS: Tertiary care center. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent advanced endoscopic resections for colorectal neoplasms from November 2011 to August 2022. INTERVENTIONS: Endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection, hybrid endoscopic submucosal dissection, and combined endoscopic laparoscopic surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Predictors of en bloc and R0 resection, bleeding, and perforation were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression models. Cox regression models were used to determine the predictors of tumor recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 1213 colorectal lesions from 1047 patients were resected (median age 66 [interquartile range, 58-72] years, 484 women [46.2%], median BMI 28.6 [interquartile range, 24.8-32.6]). Most neoplasms were in the proximal colon (898; 74%). The median lesion size was 30 (interquartile range, 20-40; range, 0-120) mm. Nine hundred eleven lesions (75.1%) underwent previous interventions. The most common Paris and Kudo classifications were 0 to IIa flat elevation (444; 36.6%) and IIIs (301; 24.8%), respectively. En bloc and R0 resection rates were 56.6% and 54.3%, respectively. Smaller lesions, rectal location, and procedure type (endoscopic submucosal dissection) were associated with significantly higher en bloc and R0 resection rates. Bleeding and perforation rates were 5% and 6.6%, respectively. Increased age was a predictor for bleeding (OR 1.06; 95% CI, 1.03-1.09; p < 0.0001). Lesion size was a predictor for perforation (OR 1.02; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; p = 0.03). The tumor recurrence rate was 6.6%. En bloc (HR 1.41; 95% CI, 1.05-1.93; p = 0.02) and R0 resection (HR 1.49; 95% CI, 1.11-2.06; p = 0.008) were associated with decreased recurrence risk. LIMITATIONS: Single-center, retrospective study. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes of advanced endoscopic resections can be predicted by patient-related and lesion-related characteristics. See Video Abstract . PREDICTORES DE LA RESECCION R, EN BLOQUE Y LAS COMPLICACIONES POR RESECCIONES ENDOSCPICAS AVANZADAS EN CASOS DE NEOPLASIA COLORRECTAL RESULTADOS DE PROCEDIMIENTOS: ANTECEDENTES:Las técnicas avanzadas de resección endoscópica se utilizan para el tratamiento de neoplasias colorrectales que no son susceptibles de resección colonoscópica convencional. La literatura sobre los predictores de los resultados de las resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas, especialmente en una unidad de cirugía colorrectal, es limitada.OBJETIVO:Determinar los predictores de resultados a corto y largo plazo después de resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas.DISEÑO:Serie de casos retrospectivos.LUGAR:Centro de tercer nivel de atención.PACIENTES:Pacientes sometidos a resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas por neoplasias colorrectales desde noviembre de 2011 hasta agosto de 2022.INTERVENCIÓNES:Resección endoscópica de la mucosa, disección endoscópica submucosa (ESD), ESD híbrida, cirugía laparoscópica endoscópica combinada.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los predictores de resección en bloque y R0, sangrado y perforación se determinaron mediante modelos de regresión logística univariables y multivariables. Se utilizaron modelos de regresión de Cox para determinar los predictores de recurrencia del tumor.RESULTADOS:Se resecaron 1.213 lesiones colorrectales en 1.047 pacientes [edad media 66 (58-72) años, 484 (46,2%) mujeres, índice de masa corporal medio 28,6 (24,8-32,6) kg/m 2 ]. La mayoría de las neoplasias se encontraban en el colon proximal (898, 74%). El tamaño medio de la lesión fue de 30mm (RIC: 20-40, rango: 0-120). 911 (75,1%) lesiones tenían intervenciones previas. Las clasificaciones de París y Kudo más comunes fueron 0-IIa elevación plana (444, 36,6%) y III (301, 24,8%), respectivamente. Las tasas de resección en bloque y R0 fueron del 56,6% y 54,3%, respectivamente. Las lesiones más pequeñas, la ubicación rectal y el tipo de procedimiento (ESD) se asociaron con tasas de resección en bloque y R0 significativamente más altas. Las tasas de sangrado y perforación fueron del 5% y 6,6%, respectivamente. La edad avanzada [1,06 (1,03-1,09), p < 0,0001] fue un predictor de sangrado. El tamaño de la lesión [1,02 (1,00-1,03), p = 0,03] fue un predictor de perforación. La tasa de recurrencia del tumor fue del 6,6%. En bloque [HR 1,41 (IC 95% 1,05-1,93), p = 0,02] y la resección R0 [HR 1,49 (IC 95% 1,11-2,06), p = 0,008] se asociaron con un menor riesgo de recurrencia.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico, retrospectivo.CONCLUSIONES:Los resultados de las resecciones endoscópicas avanzadas pueden predecirse según las características del paciente y de la lesión. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Perioperative outcomes of ileorectal anastomosis - an analysis of 823 patients.

AIM: Ileorectal anastomosis (IRA) following total abdominal colectomy (TAC) allows for resortation of bowel continuity but prior studies have reported rates of anastomotic leak (AL) to be as high as 23%. We aimed to report rates of AL and complications in a large cohort of patients undergoing IRA. We hypothesized that AL rates were lower than previously reported and that selective use of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) is associated with decreased AL rates. METHOD: Patients undergoing TAC or end-ileostomy reversal with IRA, with or without DLI, between 1980 and 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained institutional database and retrospectively analysed. Redo IRA cases were excluded. Short-term (30-day) surgical outcomes were collected using our database. AL was defined using a combination of imaging and, in the case of return to the operating room, intraoperative findings. RESULTS: Of 823 patients in the study cohort, DLI was performed in 27% and performed more frequently for constipation and inflammatory bowel disease. The overall AL rate was 3% (1% and 4% in those with and without DLI, respectively) and diversion was found to be protective against leak (OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.94, p = 0.04). However, patients undergoing diversion had a higher overall rate of postoperative complications (51% vs. 36%, p < 0.001) including superficial wound infection, urinary tract infection, dehydration, blood transfusion and portomesenteric venous thrombosis (all p < 0.04). CONCLUSION: Our study represents the largest series of patients undergoing IRA reported to date and demonstrates an AL rate of 3%. While IRA appears to be a viable surgical option for diverse indications, our study underscores the importance of careful patient selection and thoughtful consideration of staging the anastomosis and temporary faecal diversion when necessary.

Risk Factors for Microscopic Disease Positivity at Ileocolic Resection Margins for Crohn's Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Interest in microscopic margin positivity during surgical resection of medical-refractory Crohn's disease has been renewed with multiple recent studies showing an association between microscopic margin positivity with disease recurrence. Our aim was to determine risk factors for microscopic margin disease positivity following ileocolic resection (ICR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospectively-maintained database of patients with Crohn's disease undergoing ICR at a tertiary-referral center was queried. Margin positivity was defined as the presence of cryptitis, erosion, transmural inflammation with lymphoid aggregates, or architectural distortion at either ileal (proximal) or colonic (distal) margins. RESULTS: Amongst 584 patients, 97 patients had a positive microscopic margin (17%) of which 46% had a positive proximal margin, 17% had a positive distal margin, and 13% had both positive and distal margins. Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, index ICR was associated with less odds of positive margin (odds ratio [OR] 0.46, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.24-0.89, p=0.02), and granuloma presence was associated with increased odds (OR 2.26, 95% CI 1.23-4.21, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: We found that repeat ileocolic resection and granuloma presence were predictors of microscopic margin disease.

Feasibility of opioid-free surgery for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: Patients undergoing colorectal surgery or those with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are particularly at risk for opioid-related complications and progression to long-term opioid dependence. The aim of this work is to explore the real-world possibility of perioperative opioid avoidance in colorectal surgery and IBD. METHOD: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients aggregated from two prospective studies on multimodal postoperative pain control conducted at a single tertiary referral centre. All patients underwent major colorectal surgery with bowel resection. Patients with chronic preoperative opioid use were excluded. Opioid use was measured in oral morphine equivalents (OME) each postoperative day (POD) and cumulatively for the first 72 h. RESULTS: Our cohort of 209 patients included 148 (71%) with IBD and 61 (29%) non-IBD patients. IBD patients required significantly more opioids cumulatively over the first 72 postoperative hours compared with non-IBD patients [median OME 77 mg (interquartile range 33-148 mg) vs. 4 mg (interquartile range 17-82 mg), respectively; p = 0.001]. Five percent of IBD patients achieved opioid-free postoperative pain control during the entire 72 h postoperative period compared with 12% of non-IBD patients. Only 7% of IBD patients avoided opioid use on POD 1 compared with 20% of non-IBD patients (p = 0.02); however the number of IBD patients increased to 16% on POD 2 then 40% on POD 3, closely resembling the non-IBD cohort at 49% (p = 0.22). CONCLUSION: In the era of modern enhanced recovery protocols and minimally invasive techniques, we show that early postoperative opioid avoidance is feasible in a limited number of IBD patients after colorectal surgery.

A Single-Center Experience of Transanal Proctectomy With IPAA for IBD.

BACKGROUND: Restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA is the standard procedure in ulcerative colitis patients with medical refractory disease or dysplasia and select patients with IBD unclassified or Crohn's disease. A variety of minimally invasive techniques have become increasingly utilized, including the transanal IPAA. Unfortunately, despite its growing popularity, there is a lack of high-quality data for the transanal approach. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate clinical outcomes, including complication rates, during our initial experience with the transanal approach. DESIGN: The study design was a single-center prospective case series. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: The study included patients with ulcerative colitis, IBD unclassified, and Crohn's disease undergoing 2- or 3-stage restorative proctocolectomy with IPAA. INTERVENTIONS: Consecutive patients after November 2016 undergoing restorative proctocolectomy with transanal approach were compared with a historic cohort of patients who underwent an open approach before October 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was early and late anastomotic leak rates during our learning curve. Secondary outcomes included postoperative clinical measures. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 100 open and 65 transanal approach patients. Median (interquartile range) estimated blood loss was lower with the transanal approach (100 [50-150] vs 150 [100-250] mL; p = 0.007), and hospital stay was lower in the transanal group by 2 days ( p < 0.001). There was a significantly higher rate of anastomotic leaks with the transanal approach compared with the open approach (n = 7 [11%] vs n = 2 [2%] respectively; p = 0.03). There were fewer, but statistically insignificant, anastomotic complications in the third tertile, which was later in our learning curve. LIMITATIONS: The study was nonrandomized with consecutive assignment, introducing possible selection and chronology biases. CONCLUSION: Restorative proctocolectomy with the transanal approach was associated with lower blood loss and shorter hospital stay but a significantly higher anastomotic leak rate. The transanal minimally invasive approach for pouch surgery offers some advantages but carries a steep learning curve. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B842 . EXPERIENCIA DE UN SOLO CENTRO DE PROCTECTOMA TRANSANAL CON ANASTOMOSIS ILEOANAL CON RESERVORIO ILEAL PARA ENFERMEDAD INFLAMATORIA INTESTINAL: ANTECEDENTES:La proctocolectomía restaurativa con anastomosis ileoanal con reservorio ileal es el procedimiento estándar en pacientes con colitis ulcerativa con enfermedad médica refractaria o displasia y pacientes seleccionados con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal no clasificada o enfermedad de Crohn. Se ha utilizado cada vez más una variedad de técnicas mínimamente invasivas, incluido el enfoque de anastomosis ileoanal con reservorio ileal transanal. Desafortunadamente, a pesar de su creciente popularidad, hay falta de datos de alta calidad para el enfoque transanal.OBJETIVO:Investigar los resultados clínicos, incluidas las tasas de complicaciones, durante nuestra experiencia inicial con el enfoque transanal.DISEÑO:Serie de casos prospectivos de un solo centro.AJUSTES:Centro de referencia terciario.PACIENTES:Pacientes con ulcerativa, enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal no clasificada y enfermedad de Crohn sometidos a proctocolectomía restaurativa de 2 o 3 etapas con anastomosis ileoanal con reservorio ileal.INTERVENCIONES:Pacientes consecutivos después de noviembre del 2016 sometidos a proctocolectomía restaurativa con abordaje transanal fueron comparados con una cohorte histórica que se sometieron a un abordaje abierto antes de octubre del 2016.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La principal medida de resultado fueron las tasas de fuga anastomótica temprana y tardía durante nuestra curva de aprendizaje. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron medidas clínicas postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:El grupo de estudio estuvo formado por 100 pacientes con abordaje abierto y 65 por vía transanal. La media de pérdida sanguínea estimada fue menor con el abordaje transanal (100 [50-150] vs 150 [100-250] mL; p = 0.007) y la estancia hospitalaria fue menor en el grupo transanal por 2 días ( p < 0.001). Hubo una tasa significativamente mayor de fugas anastomóticas con el abordaje transanal en comparación con el abordaje abierto (n = 7 [11%] vs n = 2 [2%] respectivamente, p = 0.03). Hubo menos complicaciones anastomóticas, pero estadísticamente insignificantes, en el tercer tercil, posterior en nuestra curva de aprendizaje.LIMITACIONES:Estudio no randomizado con asignación consecutiva que presenta posibles sesgos de selección y cronología.CONCLUSIÓNES:La proctocolectomía restaurativa con abordaje transanal se asoció a una menor pérdida sanguínea y estancia hospitalaria más corta, pero con una tasa de fuga anastomótica significativamente mayor. El abordaje transanal mínimamente invasivo para cirugía de reservorio ofrece algunas ventajas, pero conlleva a una curva de aprendizaje pronunciada. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B842 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Surgeon-Administered Intraoperative Transversus Abdominis Plane Block With Bupivacaine Against Liposomal Bupivacaine: The TINGLE Trial.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane blocks are increasingly used to achieve opioid-sparing analgesia after colorectal surgery. Traditionally, bupivacaine was the long-acting analgesic of choice, but the addition of dexamethasone and/or epinephrine to bupivacaine may extend block duration. Liposomal bupivacaine has also been suggested to achieve an extended analgesia duration of 72 hours but is significantly more expensive. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare pain control between laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane blocks using liposomal bupivacaine versus bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone. DESIGN: This was a parallel-group, single-institution, randomized clinical trial. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a single tertiary medical center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients between October 2018 to October 2019, ages 18 to 90 years, undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery with multimodal analgesia were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive a laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included pain scores, time to ambulation and solid diet, hospital length of stay, and complications. RESULTS: A total of 102 patients (50 men) with a median age of 42 years (interquartile range, 29-60 y) consented and were randomly assigned. The primary end point, total oral morphine equivalents administered in the first 48 hours, was not significantly different between the liposomal bupivacaine group (median = 69 mg) and the bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone group (median = 47 mg; difference in medians = 22 mg, (95% CI, -17 to 49 mg); p = 0.60). There were no significant differences in pain scores, time to ambulation, time to diet tolerance, time to bowel movement, length of stay, overall complications, or readmission rate between groups. There were no treatment-related adverse outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was not placebo controlled or blinded. CONCLUSIONS: This first randomized trial comparing laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block with liposomal bupivacaine or bupivacaine with epinephrine and dexamethasone showed that a liposomal bupivacaine block does not provide superior or extended analgesia in the era of standardized multimodal analgesia protocols.See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533. ESTUDIO PROSPECTIVO Y RANDOMIZADO DE BLOQUEO DEL PLANO MUSCULAR TRANSVERSO DEL ABDOMEN REALIZADO POR EL CIRUJANO CON BUPIVACANA VERSUS BUPIVACANA LIPOSOMAL ESTUDIO TINGLE: ANTECEDENTES:El bloqueo anestésico del plano muscular transverso del abdomen se utiliza cada vez más para lograr una analgesia con menos consumo de opioides después de cirugía colorrectal. Tradicionalmente, la Bupivacaína era el analgésico de acción prolongada de elección, pero al agregarse Dexametasona y/o Adrenalina a la Bupivacaína se puede prolongar la duración del bloqueo. También se ha propuesto que la Bupivacaína liposomal logra una duración prolongada de la analgesia de 72 horas, pero es significativamente más cara.OBJETIVO:Comparar el control del dolor entre bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen usando Bupivacaína liposomal versus Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.DISEÑO:Estudio clínico prospectivo y randomizado de una sola institución en grupos paralelos.AJUSTE:Centro médico terciario único.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos pacientes entre 18 y 90 años sometidos a cirugía colorrectal mínimamente invasiva con analgesia multimodal, entre octubre de 2018 a octubre de 2019 incluidos de manera consecutiva.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron seleccionados aleatoriamente 1:1 para recibir un bloqueo laparoscópico del plano de los transversos del abdomen con Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue el total de equivalentes de morfina oral administradas en las primeras 48 horas después de la operación. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron puntuaciones de dolor, inicio de dieta sólida, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, la estadía hospitalaria y las complicaciones.RESULTADOS:Un total de 102 pacientes (50 hombres) con una mediana de edad de 42 años (IQR 29-60) fueron incluidos aleatoriamente. El criterio de valoración principal, equivalentes de morfina oral total administrada en las primeras 48 horas, no fue significativamente diferente entre el grupo de Bupivacaína liposomal (mediana = 69 mg) y el grupo de Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona (mediana = 47 mg; diferencia en medianas = 22 mg, IC del 95% [-17] - 49 mg, p = 0,60). No hubo diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones de dolor, tiempo de inicio a la deambulación, el tiempo de tolerancia a la dieta sólida, el tiempo hasta el primer evacuado intestinal, la duración de la estadía hospitalaria, las complicaciones generales o la tasa de readmisión entre los grupos. No hubo resultados adversos relacionados con el tratamiento.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio no fue controlado con placebo ni de manera cegada.CONCLUSIONES:Este primer estudio prospectivo y randomizado que comparó el bloqueo del plano de los músculos transversos del abdomen por vía laparoscópica, utilizando Bupivacaína liposomal o Bupivacaína con Adrenalina y Dexametasona, demostró que el bloqueo de Bupivacaína liposomal no proporciona ni mejor analgesia ni un efecto mas prolongado.Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B533.

Preoperative Serum Vedolizumab Levels Do Not Impact Postoperative Outcomes in Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab has been proposed to lead to fewer postoperative complications because of its gut specificity. Studies, however, suggest an increased risk of surgical site infections, yet the data are conflicting. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the effect of vedolizumab drug levels on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery for IBD. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of a prospectively maintained database. SETTING: Patients were operated on by a single surgeon at an academic medical center. PATIENTS: A total of 72 patients with IBD undergoing major abdominal surgery were included. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were exposed preoperatively to vedolizumab. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the postoperative morbidity in patients who had IBD with detectable vs undetectable vedolizumab levels. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were included in the study. Thirty-eight patients had detectable vedolizumab levels (>1.6 µg/mL), and 34 had undetectable vedolizumab levels. The overall rate of complications was 39%, and ileus was the most common complication. There were no significant differences in clinical variables between the detectable and undetectable vedolizumab level patient groups except for the time between the last dose and surgery (p < 0.01). There were 42 patients in the ulcerative colitis cohort; 48% had an undetectable vedolizumab level and 52% had a detectable vedolizumab level. There were no differences in any postoperative morbidity between ulcerative colitis groups. The Crohn's cohort had 27 patients; 48% had an undetectable vedolizumab levels and 52% had a detectable vedolizumab level. There was a significantly lower incidence of postoperative ileus in patients who had Crohn's disease with detectable vedolizumab levels compared with patients with an undetectable vedolizumab level (p < 0.04). LIMITATIONS: Limitations include a low overall patient population and a high rate of stoma formation. CONCLUSIONS: Serum vedolizumab levels do not influence postoperative morbidity in IBD. Vedolizumab may reduce the incidence of postoperative ileus in patients with Crohn's disease. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B574. LOS NIVELES DE VEDOLIZUMAB EN SUERO PREOPERATORIO, NO AFECTAN LOS RESULTADOS POSTOPERATORIOS EN LA ENFERMEDAD INFLAMATORIA INTESTINAL: ANTECEDENTES:Se ha propuesto que el vedolizumab presenta menos complicaciones postoperatorias debido a su especificidad intestinal. Sin embargo, estudios sugieren un mayor riesgo de infecciones en el sitio quirúrgico, aunque los datos son contradictorios.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el efecto en los niveles del fármaco vedolizumab, en resultados postoperatorios de pacientes sometidos a cirugía mayor abdominal, por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal.DISEÑO:Estudio retrospectivo de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Pacientes intervenidos por un solo cirujano en un centro médico académico.PACIENTES:Un total de 72 pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal sometidos a cirugía mayor abdominal.INTERVENCIONES:Exposición preoperatoria a vedolizumab.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Morbilidad postoperatoria en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, con niveles detectables versus no detectables de vedolizumab.RESULTADOS:Se incluyó en el estudio a un total de 72 pacientes. Treinta y ocho pacientes tuvieron niveles detectables de vedolizumab (> 1,6 mcg / ml) y 34 con niveles no detectables de vedolizumab. La tasa global de complicaciones fue del 39% y el íleo fue la complicación más común. No hubo diferencias significativas en las variables clínicas entre los grupos de pacientes con niveles detectables y no detectables de vedolizumab, excepto por el intervalo de tiempo entre la última dosis y la cirugía (p <.01). La cohorte de colitis ulcerosa tuvo 42 pacientes, el 48% con un nivel no detectable de vedolizumab y el 52% un nivel detectable de vedolizumab. No hubo diferencias en ninguna morbilidad postoperatoria entre los grupos de colitis ulcerosa. La cohorte de Crohn tuvo 27 pacientes, 48% con niveles no detectables de vedolizumab y el 52% con niveles detectables de vedolizumab. Hubo una incidencia significativamente menor de íleo postoperatorio en pacientes de Crohn con niveles detectables de vedolizumab, comparados con los pacientes con un nivel no detectable de vedolizumab (p <0,04).LIMITACIONES:Las limitaciones incluyen una baja población general de pacientes y una alta tasa de formación de estomas.CONCLUSIONES:Los niveles séricos de vedolizumab no influyen en la morbilidad postoperatoria de la enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. Vedolizumab puede reducir la incidencia de íleo postoperatorio en pacientes de Crohn. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B574.

Is synoptic operative reporting necessary for Crohn's disease surgery? Variability in surgical reports across inflammatory bowel disease referral centres.

AIM: Ileocolic resection (ICR) is the most commonly performed operation in Crohn's disease (CD) patients. The surgical report is a vital tool for accessing information to gauge a patient's long-term prognosis and guide treatment decisions. Dictated narrative reports are the traditional method for surgical documentation but often lack essential information. The objective was to assess the quality of operation note in CD patients undergoing ICR. METHOD: This was a multi-institutional retrospective cohort collaborative study involving four tertiary inflammatory bowel disease referral centres in the USA and Canada. The patients were consecutive CD patients undergoing ICR between 2014 and 2020. There were no interventions. The main outcome measures were the variability and frequency of 28 critical items in the operation note. RESULTS: An analysis of 400 consecutive operation reports in four institutions (n = 100/institution) revealed significant variability in almost all variables. The initial surgical approach and wound protector use were the most consistently or frequently reported across all inflammatory bowel disease centres. The limitation was that this was a retrospective cohort study with inevitable selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the need for synoptic reporting in CD patients undergoing ICR.

Antitumour necrosis factor therapy is associated with de novo Crohn's disease after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis.

AIM: Tumour necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi) have revolutionized the management of moderate to severe ulcerative colitis (UC) since their approval for UC in 2005. However, many patients ultimately require surgery with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA). Development of de novo Crohn's disease (CD) following IPAA is an increasingly common and devastating complication, sometimes progressing to pouch failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of preoperative TNFi exposure and the development of de novo CD after IPAA. METHOD: A prospective single-centre inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) registry was searched for consecutive patients with UC undergoing IPAA during a 25-year period ending July 2018. Patients with preoperative CD or IBD-unclassified were excluded. De novo CD was diagnosed upon endoscopic evidence of five or more mucosal ulcers proximal to the ileal pouch any time after surgery and/or pouch fistula occurring more than three months after ileostomy closure. RESULTS: The study cohort consisted of 400 patients with a median follow-up of 44.0 (IQR 11-113) months. Sixty-two (16%) patients developed de novo CD 28.0 (IQR 6-67) months following ileostomy closure. Survival analysis of TNFi era patients revealed a significant increase in de novo CD risk in those with preoperative TNFi exposure. Multivariable proportional hazards modelling revealed two independent predictors for de novo CD development: older age was protective (HR 0.89 per 5-year increase; P = 0.009) and preoperative TNFi exposure was hazardous (HR 2.10; P = 0.011). CONCLUSION: This prospective study is the first to suggest an association between preoperative TNFi exposure and the development of de novo CD.

Step-by-step guide to safe removal of pre-peritoneal inguinal mesh.

BACKGROUND: Inguinal hernia repairs are among the most common operations performed worldwide. An increasing number is performed minimally invasively with mesh placed pre-peritoneally. Some situations may require mesh removal. This can be complex and challenging. We share our technique to remove pre-peritoneal mesh using a minimally invasive approach. METHODS: The multiple steps involved in robotic-assisted pre-peritoneal mesh removal are reviewed in detail, including preoperative planning, intraoperative positioning, review of anatomic landmarks, and systematic approach with technical tips to reduce complications. RESULTS: We provide an attached narrated video guide with a written summary to outline pre-peritoneal inguinal mesh removal. The steps are applicable to both robotic-assisted and laparoscopic approaches. We present a video of the robotic-assisted approach. We prefer the robotic-assisted approach for most pre-peritoneal mesh removal based on results of our retrospective series of 26 patients undergoing 31 mesh removals. We noted that our robotic-assisted approach was more effective than the laparoscopic approach, with significantly less incidence of vascular injury (0 vs 5, p < 0.05) and less nerve (1 vs 4) and spermatic cord injuries (0 vs 1). CONCLUSIONS: As pre-peritoneal inguinal mesh implantation becomes more popular, surgeons may be seeing more patients with complications who may require mesh removal. We provide a detailed step-by-step approach with video to serve as a guide to surgeons who are planning for safe removal of pre-peritoneal inguinal hernia mesh.

A Single-Center Comparative Study of Open Transabdominal and Laparoscopic Transanal Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis with Total Mesorectal Excision. Has the Bar Been Raised?

BACKGROUND: Most ulcerative colitis (UC) patients requiring surgery undergo transabdominal ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) performed minimally invasively or open. Although one multicenter study demonstrated acceptably low morbidity after transanal pouch, our initial single-center experience with transanal IPAA (ta-IPAA) was associated with an unacceptably high rate of anastomotic leak. The aim of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of ta-IPAA and transabdominal IPAA with growing experience of transanal proctectomy and determine whether one approach offered any advantage or benefit over the other. METHODS: Single-center series of consecutive ulcerative colitis patients underwent 3-stage IPAA, either ta-IPAA or transabdominal IPAA at a tertiary referral center. The primary outcome measure was overall complications until immediately prior to stoma closure. Secondary outcomes included postoperative clinical measures. RESULTS: The study group consisted of 113 patients, which included 37 (33%) patients undergoing transabdominal or open IPAA and 76 (67%) patients undergoing ta-IPAA. The overall complication rate was numerically higher in the ta-IPAA group (56%) compared to the transabdominal group (38%) (p = 0.07) as was the incidence of anastomotic leak in the ta-IPAA group (12 vs. 5%) (p = 0.17). Mean length of hospital stay was significantly higher in the transanal IPAA group (p = 0.04). Operating time, opioid use and pain scores were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Transanal IPAA has a higher incidence of overall complications and anastomotic leak compared to transabdominal IPAA. Postoperative length of stay is significantly higher in patients undergoing ta-IPAA. Operating room time, opiate use and pain scores are comparable between the two surgical approaches. Transanal IPAA appears to offer little advantage over transabdominal IPAA.

The Fellow's Perspective: The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Fellowship Training and Job Appointment.

BACKGROUND: Fellows have been uniquely affected by the widespread changes in educational structure, mandatory limitations in elective procedural volume, and hiring freezes during the COVID-19 global pandemic. STUDY DESIGN: A voluntary and anonymous survey was distributed to all Graduate Medical Education fellows at a tertiary medical center querying perspectives on clinical and didactic training and job placement. RESULTS: A total of 47 of 121 fellows (39%) completed the survey. The majority were in a medical (43%) or surgical specialty (34%) followed by critical care (13%) and procedure-based (11%) fellowships. Approximately 59% of surveyed fellows felt their programs were providing a virtual curriculum that would train them just as well as the in-person curriculum. Twenty-eight (60%) fellows were in their final or only year of training. Of the 25 fellows who were seeking employment, 52% have experienced difficulty in finding a job due to hiring freezes and 40% have encountered challenges with job interview cancellations and changes to virtual interview formats. CONCLUSION: Almost half of surveyed fellows reported an educational deterioration due to COVID-19 and graduating fellows seeking employment felt hindered by both the virtual interview format and widespread hiring freeze. Fellows are both unique and vulnerable as they balance the solidification of clinical training with securing employment during these tumultuous and unprecedented times.

The lasting footprint of COVID-19 on surgical education: A resident and attending perspective on the global pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted surgical training nationwide. Our former curricula will likely not return, and training will need to adapt, so we are able to graduate residents of the same caliber as prior to the pandemic. METHODS: A survey evaluating perceptions of changes made in surgical training was conducted on surgery residents and attendings. RESULTS: Disaster medicine training has become more relevant and 85% residents and 75% attendings agreed it should be incorporated into the curriculum. Safety of family was the most significant concern of residents. Virtual curriculum was perceived to be acceptable by 82% residents and only 22% attendings (p < 0.01). Residents (37%) were less concerned than attendings (61%) of falling behind on their overall training (p = 0.04). Both groups agreed operative skills would be adversely affected (56%vs72%; p = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: To maintain an effective surgical curriculum, programs will need to implement new educational components to better prepare residents to become surgeons of the future.

Clinical Factors Associated With Response to Fecal Diversion in Crohn's Disease.

Up to 80% of Crohn's disease (CD) patients require surgery. Fecal diversion is used selectively in CD proctocolitis refractory to medical treatment or advanced perianal disease. This study examines associations between clinical features in predicting clinical response (CR) to fecal diversion in CD. Charts of CD patients undergoing fecal diversion for medically refractory disease or perianal disease were reviewed. Clinical response was assessed focusing on improvements in urgency, abdominal and perineal pain, decreased anal fistula drainage, and weight gain. Univariate binary logistic regression and multivariate forward-stepwise modeling analysis were used to determine associations with CR. The study cohort comprised 79 patients. After a median follow-up of 36 (3-192) months, 40 (51%) patients achieved a CR. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed both age at diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05; confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.09; P = .007) and disease duration (HR .91; CI .86-.96; P = .001) to be significantly associated with CR. Later age of onset (HR 1.05; CI 1.01-1.10; P = .002) and shorter disease duration (HR .91; CI .86-.97; P = .02) remained significant on multivariate analysis. This largest reported series of fecal diversion for refractory CD in the biologic drug era revealed that young age at diagnosis and long disease duration are associated with a lower CR.

A Standardized Multimodal Analgesia Protocol Reduces Perioperative Opioid Use in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia protocols are becoming a common part of enhanced recovery pathways after colorectal surgery. However, few protocols include a robust intraoperative component in addition to pre-operative and post-operative analgesics. METHOD: A prospective cohort study was performed in an urban teaching hospital in patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery before and after implementation of a multimodal analgesia protocol consisting of pre-operative (gabapentin, acetaminophen, celecoxib), intraoperative (lidocaine and magnesium infusions, ketorolac, transversus abdominis plane block), and post-operative (gabapentin, acetaminophen, celecoxib) opioid-sparing elements. The main outcome measure was use of morphine equivalents in the first 24-h post-operative period. RESULTS: The study cohort (n = 71) included 41 patients before and 30 patients after implementation of a multimodal analgesia protocol. Mean age of the entire study cohort was 47 ± 19.7 years and 46% were male. Patients undergoing surgery post-multimodal analgesia vs. pre-multimodal analgesia had significantly lower use of IV morphine equivalents in first 24-h post-operative period (5.8 ± 6.4 mg vs. 22.8 ± 21.3 mg; p = 0.005) and first 48-h post-operative period (7.6 ± 9.4 mg vs. 42 ± 52.9 mg; p = 0.0008). This reduction in IV morphine equivalent use post-multimodal analgesia was coupled with improved pain scores in the post-operative period. Post-operative hospital length of stay, post-operative ileus, and overall complications were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal analgesia incorporating pre-operative, intraoperative, and post-operative opioid-sparing agents is an effective method for reducing perioperative opioid utilization and pain after minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

Anorectal Crohn's Disease.

Medical treatment remains the mainstay of perianal disease management for CD; however, aggressive surgical management should be considered for severe or recurrent disease. In all cases of perianal CD, medical and surgical treatments should be used in tandem by a multidisciplinary team. Significant development has been made in the treatment of Crohn's-related fistulas, particularly minimally invasive options with recent clinical trials showing success with mesenchymal stem cell applications. Inevitably, some patients with severe refractory disease may require fecal diversion or proctectomy. When considering reversal of a diverting or end ileostomy, cessation of proctitis is the most important factor.

No Pain, More Gain: Reduced Postoperative Opioid Consumption with a Standardized Opioid-Sparing Multimodal Analgesia Protocol in Opioid-Tolerant Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery.

The utility of opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia protocols (OSMMAPs) in opioid-tolerant (OT) patients is unknown. We sought to determine the impact of a standardized OSMMAP in OT versus opioid-naïve (ON) patients after major colorectal surgery. Consecutive patients undergoing surgery before (January 2015-March 2017) and after OSMMAP implementation (April 2017-March 2018) were identified from a single-institution prospective colorectal surgery registry. OT was defined by the presence of an opioid on the preadmission medication record. Opioid use (measured in oral morphine equivalents (OMEs)) and surgical outcomes were compared between OT and ON patients pre- and post-OSMMAP. The study cohort of 201 patients included 59 OT patients (25 pre- and 34 post-OSMMAP) and 142 ON controls (34 pre- and 108 post-OSMMAP). The median age was 47.5 years (IQR 32), and 50% were male. 185 patients (92%) had a laparoscopic/robotic resection and 16 (8%) open. There were statistically significant reductions in OME required post-OSMMAP on each postoperative day (days 1 to 4) and cumulative OME for both OT and ON patients. The reduction in opioid requirements was significantly larger in OT than ON patients. We present the first study highlighting a larger opioid usage reduction in OT than in ON patients after OSMMAP implementation.

Preservation of Pathologic Outcomes in Robotic versus Open Resection for Rectal Cancer: Can the Robot Fill the Minimally Invasive Gap?

Open resection remains the standard of care in the surgical management of rectal cancer with recent studies unable to prove noninferiority of laparoscopic resection. Few studies directly compare robotic versus open techniques. This is a retrospective chart review of all consecutive patients undergoing robotic or open rectal cancer resection during a three-year period. The primary endpoint was a composite of complete mesorectal excision, circumferential resection margin <1 mm, and distal resection margin <1 mm. The study cohort included 64 patients undergoing robotic (n = 28) or open (n = 36) resection. Successful surgical resection was similar between the robotic (75%) and open (76%) approaches. Robotic resection was associated with significantly lower blood loss (P = 0.02) and significantly longer operative times (P = 0.009) compared with open resection. Length of hospital stay and complications were similar between groups. Both male gender (P = 0.03) and shorter tumor distance from the anal verge (P = 0.01) were predictors for unsuccessful surgical resection in open, but not robotic, surgery. Pathologic outcomes are similar between robotic and open rectal cancer resection, even early in the learning curve. Tumor distance from the anal verge complicates open total mesorectal excision; however, robotic surgery is less impacted. Robotic resection may be a promising minimally invasive approach for rectal cancer resection.