Spontaneous Enterocutaneous Fistula.

Spontaneous scrotal enterocutaneous fistulas (ECFs) are rare and more common in countries with poor access to medical care. Our patients represent the first two reported adult cases of scrotal ECFs in the United States. Both patients were 83-year-old males who presented from assisted living facilities with past medical histories of prostate cancer. The first patient had an ECF from his cecum to right scrotum and the second patient had an ECF from his sigmoid colon to left scrotum. These are the first recorded cases describing spontaneous scrotal ECFs in adults in the United States. They are also the seventh and eighth reported cases worldwide. Both patients had delayed presentations of their incarcerated hernias because their scrotal ECFs decompressed their incarcerated bowels and attenuated the development of obstructive symptoms. Each patient underwent a successful orchiectomy by urology and bowel resection with ligation of their scrotal ECFs, and herniorrhaphy by general surgery.

Colorectal Cancer Screening in the Elderly: Is Age Just a Number?

INTRODUCTION: Colorectal cancer screening improved outcomes for patients diagnosed between the age of 45-75. Present life expectancy is beyond this limit, yet there are no guidelines for these ages. We aim to identify outcomes after screening and intervention in patients ≥75 years and correlate with frailty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records between 2011 and 2019 were queried. Patients ≥75 screened and treated for colorectal cancer were included. Patient demographics, perioperative mortality, age at last colonoscopy and frailty score were calculated. A Modified Frailty Index from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging Frailty Index was used. A score of 1 to 11 was calculated based on patient comorbidities. The MFI was assigned from 0 to 11: 0 signified absence of frailty and 11 indicated maximum frailty. RESULTS: Of 179 patients were identified, 46.3% males. 171(95%) had elective and 8 (5%) had emergent surgery. The average age was 81.8 years. All colonoscopies were performed for symptoms. A modified frailty index was retrospectively calculated; 75% of patients scored between 0 and 2 and 1% scored >6. CONCLUSION: Older patients who underwent colonoscopy and surgery for symptomatic colon cancer had a low mortality, 2%. The average age was 6.8 years older than the recommended cutoff for colonoscopy screening. Most patients scored 0 to 2 on the modified frailty index, suggesting that not only are older patients more fit than previously thought, but also able to tolerate colorectal interventions more liberally. Utilizing frailty indices to identify screening patterns beyond 75 years of age might prove beneficial for this patient population. Further studies are recommended.

Comprehensive enhanced recovery pathway significantly reduces postoperative length of stay and opioid usage in elective laparoscopic colectomy.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) was implemented in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy in an attempt to reduce postoperative opioid consumption. We hypothesized that improved local analgesia and increased use of non-opioid pain medication, combined with earlier feeding and ambulation, would allow for earlier return of bowel function and shorter postoperative length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 89 patients who underwent elective partial laparoscopic colectomy with our ERP fully integrated compared to a historical control group of 162 patients. Differences between the ERP and control groups average return of bowel function, postoperative LOS, opioid medication usage, and complications were compared statistically using the student's t-test and Fisher exact test. Pain was controlled with the laparoscope-guided transversus abdominis plane (TAP), scheduled doses of non-narcotic medications, and reserved use of opioids. Patient, nursing and resident education regarding all aspects of the ERP was emphasized. RESULTS: Patients in the ERP group had a significant decrease of opioid usage, earlier return of bowel function, and shorter postoperative hospital LOS. Opioid use was reduced from 75 to 19 mg I.V. morphine (p = 0.0001). Patients had an average return of bowel function of 0.66 days earlier from postoperative day (POD) 2.99 to POD 2.33 (p = 0.0001) and were discharged from the hospital 1 day sooner on POD 2.7 compared with POD 3.7 (p = 0.0013). There was no statistically significant difference in postoperative complications between the control and ERP groups. CONCLUSION: The new ERP, including TAP block and postoperative pain medication protocol limiting I.V. narcotics, is effective in controlling pain in elective partial laparoscopic colectomy. Pain control management together with regimented early feeding and ambulation allow for significantly earlier return of bowel function and shorter postoperative LOS.

Laparoscopic repair of colonic anastomotic leak in an elderly patient.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopy to repair iatrogenic colonoscopic perforation of the colon has proven to be a safe, effective, and reproducible means to treat these potentially devastating emergencies. The use of the laparoscope provides exceptional diagnostic yield, and under the hand of a trained surgeon, produces excellent therapeutic results while minimizing recovery time for the patient. METHODS: We report the case of an 86-year-old man who underwent emergent laparoscopic repair of a postoperative anastomotic leak following sigmoid colectomy. RESULTS: The patient underwent laparoscopic oversewing of a colonic anastomotic leak, omental patch, and diverting loop ileostomy. The patient recovered fully from his emergency procedure without any further complications. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery can be extended to a wider variety of colorectal emergencies in a carefully selected group of patients, including the elderly.

Laparoscopic colectomy in octogenarians and nonagenarians: a preferable option to open surgery?

OBJECTIVES: To determine if laparoscopic colectomy is safer and more effective than open colectomy in patients older than 80 years of age. METHODS: An operating room database of all colectomies performed on patients >or=80 years, from January 2002 to September 2007, was analyzed retrospectively. Data reviewed included type of operation, type of resection, length of procedure, length of stay (LOS), estimated blood loss, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, diagnosis, complications, mortality rates, and discharge destination, with p-values <0.05 considered significant. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine patients underwent open procedures (Open group) during the study period versus 150 patients who underwent laparoscopic procedures (Lap group). Of the Lap group, 15 patients were converted to open cases. Forty-four patients from the Open group were excluded from the analysis as they were treated emergently, leaving 95 patients in the Open group. The mortality for open procedures was significantly higher at 9/95 (9.4%), compared with 3/150 (2%) following laparoscopic procedures (p = 0.0132). LOS was significantly longer for open procedures (11.16 days) versus laparoscopic procedures (7.11 days), p = 0.0001. Open procedures were associated with an increased risk of postoperative ileus (p < 0.02). The Open group had a higher likelihood of discharge to a nursing facility (43/87) than the Lap group (33/147), p < 0.0001. There were no significant differences in the length of procedure, estimated blood loss and postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic colectomy is a safer option that offers an improved outcome compared with open colectomy in elderly patients. Significant improvements in LOS, mortality rates, and discharge destination were observed.

Conversion of laparoscopic colon resection does not affect survival in colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic and open resections of colon cancer are considered oncologically equivalent treatment methods. Conversion of laparoscopic procedures, however, was associated with decreased survival in colon cancer patients in the only prior study examining this question. We conducted this study to evaluate the effect of conversion on survival. METHODS: A series of consecutive patients treated with laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer (n = 174) in the period 1998-2003 was evaluated retrospectively. Median follow-up was 51 months with a minimum of 3 years. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in all-cause mortality between laparoscopically completed and converted groups (22/143, 15.4% versus 8/31, 25.8%; OR 1.9, p = 0.164). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not show any survival difference between the two groups (p = 0.266). CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest there is no survival difference in patients requiring conversion of laparoscopic resection indicated for colorectal cancer. Further examination of this question is warranted to determine whether laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer should be offered to all patients, including those at high risk for conversion.

Outcomes in patients treated by laparoscopic resection of rectal carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the effect of neoadjuvant chemo radiation on feasibility and outcomes in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic resection of the rectum. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of laparoscopic resections for rectal cancer from 1998 to 2004 (N=60). RESULTS: Eight patients received preoperative chemoradiation therapy (neoadjuvant group) for rectal cancer and 52 patients did not (primary surgical group). The conversion rate was higher in the neoadjuvant group, but this did not reach statistical significance (3/8, 37% in the neoadjuvant group vs. 7/52, 13% in the primary surgical group, P=0.12). Operative time was longer in the neoadjuvant group (170+/-60 vs 228+/-70 min, P=0.03). Complication rates (3/52, 5.7% in the primary surgical vs. 0% in the neoadjuvant group, P=1.0), and a median number of resected lymph nodes (14.5 in the primary surgical vs. 16.0 in the neoadjuvant group, P=0.81) were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic resection of rectal cancer in patients after preoperative chemoradiation treatment seems to be associated with a higher conversion rate and a longer duration of surgery. No change in mortality and morbidity was detected. We encourage further investigation of laparoscopic rectal surgery for treatment of rectal cancer.

The influence of prior abdominal operations on conversion and complication rates in laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A history of a prior abdominal operation is common among patients presenting for laparoscopic colorectal surgery, and its impact on conversion and complication rates has been insufficiently studied. This study compares the conversion rates of patients with and without a prior abdominal operation (PAO). METHODS: We analyzed 1000 consecutive laparoscopic colorectal resection cases. RESULTS: Complete data on past surgical history were available on 820 of 1000 patients. The overall conversion rate was 14.8% (122/820). A history of PAO was present in 347 patients (42.3%). These patients experienced a higher conversion rate compared with non-PAO patients (68/347, 19.6% versus 54/473, 11.4%; P < 0.001; OR 1.9). Patients with PAO had a significantly higher rate of inadvertent enterotomy (5/347, 1.4% vs. 1/473, 0.2%; P = 0.04; OR 6.9), a higher incidence of postoperative ileus (23/347, 6.6% vs 14/473% 3.0; P = 0.012; OR 2.3), and higher reoperative rates (8/347, 2.3% vs 1/473, 0.2%; P = 0.006; OR 11.1). The incidence of other complications and mortality (total 6/820, 0.7%) was similar regardless of PAO status. CONCLUSION: Having a prior abdominal operation represents a risk factor for conversion in laparoscopic colon and rectal surgery. The incidence of a successfully completed laparoscopic operation, however, remains high in previously operated on patients.

Has the 80-hour work week had an impact on voluntary attrition in general surgery residency programs?

BACKGROUND: This article attempts to assess the effect of the duty-hour limitations implemented in 2003 on voluntary withdrawal of general surgery residents. STUDY DESIGN: A questionnaire asked the program directors how many categorical general surgery residents left voluntarily in 2003 to 2004, their training levels, why they left, and where they went. Results were compared with an identical study of 2000 to 2001 and analyzed statistically using chi-square analysis. RESULTS: A total of 215 programs (85%) responded, compared with 206 programs (81%) in the previous study. One hundred two programs (48%) reported voluntary attrition of 148 residents, compared with 110 programs (53%) and 167 residents previously. An average of 1.5 residents per program left in programs that reported attrition and 0.7 residents per program in all responders, compared with 1.5 and 0.8 residents in the previous study. In both studies, most programs with attrition lost one (66% [2000 to 2001] and 65% [2003 to 2004]) or two residents (21% [2000 to 2001] and 27% [2003 to 2004]). Most attrition occurred at PGY1 (47%) and PGY2 (28%) levels; a total of 75% of all attrition occurred at these levels, compared with a total of 76% in the previous study. One hundred eleven residents (75%) entered other medical specialties, and 23 (16%) transferred to other general surgery programs, compared with 105 residents (63%) and 40 residents (24%) in the previous study. In both studies, personal issues and work hours/lifestyle were cited as the most common reasons for leaving. In each study, the net loss to general surgery (the number of residents who left voluntarily divided by the total resident population at risk) was 3% for that academic year. Analysis showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Rates and patterns of attrition seem to have been unaffected by Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education work-hours limitations.

Comparing results of residents and attending surgeons to determine whether laparoscopic colectomy is safe.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to compare the technical success and outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy performed by resident surgeons (RS) and attending surgeons (AS). METHODS: A review of 451 consecutive laparoscopic colectomies performed by 2 surgeons either with or without a general surgery resident. Data reviewed included demographics, diagnoses, operative data, and outcomes. Comparison was made between patients operated on by RS under attending surgeon supervision, and patients operated on by AS alone. RESULTS: Of 451 patients, 324 were operated on by RS and 127 by AS. The mean age and preoperative diagnoses were similar between groups. Operative time was significantly longer in the RS group (155 minutes vs. 128 minutes, P < .05). Blood loss was slightly higher in RS groups but was not statistically significant (191 mL vs. 174 mL, P = .31). The incidence of conversion to an open procedure, postoperative complications, and length of stay were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Supervised RS can safely perform laparoscopic colectomy with results similar to AS. RS take longer to perform the procedure than AS.