RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Although outcome disparities by race have been identified in colorectal cancer, these patterns are challenging to explain using variables that are commonly available in databases. In a single institution serving a diverse community, length of stay (LOS) varies by race following elective oncologic colectomy. We investigated previously unexplored variables that may explain the relationship between race and LOS following elective resection of colorectal neoplasms. METHODS: Retrospective, single institution cohort study from January 2015 to December 2020 for adult patients undergoing elective colorectal cancer resections. Baseline demographic variables and intraoperative factors were analyzed for changes in LOS following elective colorectal resection. Additional retrospective chart review was carried out to determine household member composition and distance from home to hospital. Bivariate analysis was conducted to determine which variables should be included in multivariable analyses. All analyses were conducted using SAS Academic. RESULTS: Most patients (n = 383) were Asian (40%), Black (12%), or Hispanic (26%). Race and LOS were associated with age (P = 0.001 and P < 0.001 for race and LOS, respectively), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (P = 0.004 and P < 0.001), enhanced recovery after surgery protocols (P = 0.006 and P < 0.001), household members (P = 0.009 and P = 0.002), and discharge disposition (P = 0.049 and P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, household members (P = 0.021) independently remained associated with LOS after controlling for race (P = 0.008) and discharge disposition (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Household member composition varies with LOS, suggesting that level of support at home may influence decisions regarding discharge disposition, which lead to differences in LOS.
Assuntos
Colectomia , Neoplasias Colorretais , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde , Tempo de Internação , Humanos , Masculino , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Colectomia/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/estatística & dados numéricos , Neoplasias Colorretais/cirurgia , Neoplasias Colorretais/etnologia , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Disparidades em Assistência à Saúde/etnologia , Fatores Sociodemográficos , Adulto , Recuperação Pós-Cirúrgica Melhorada , Idoso de 80 Anos ou maisRESUMO
BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the effect of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols on the weekend effect after elective colectomies. METHODS: This was a retrospective study on all elective colorectal surgeries at a single institution in New York City between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2020. The length of stay (LOS) by day of the week of surgery and the effect of ERAS using univariable and multivariable analyses were compared. RESULTS: A total of 605 patients were included in the study. Of note, 41 cases were performed on Mondays, 197 cases were performed on Tuesdays, 45 cases were performed on Wednesdays, 187 cases were performed on Thursdays, and 135 cases were performed on Fridays. Univariate analysis showed that, for patients who did not undergo ERAS, Monday and Tuesday were significantly associated with decreased LOS (P < .001). For patients who underwent ERAS, there was no statistically significant difference in LOS (P = .06) when operated on early in the week vs later. After controlling for age, race/ethnicity, comorbidities, complications, functional health status, operation type, duration of surgery, presence of ostomy, and albumin level, adhering to the ERAS protocol was significantly associated with a shorter LOS (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that ERAS can mitigate the weekend effect on LOS. ERAS protocols may provide more structure to the expected hospital course and allow patients to reach recovery milestones earlier, facilitating discharge even by covering teams.
Assuntos
Colectomia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos , Recuperação Pós-Cirúrgica Melhorada , Tempo de Internação , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Estudos Retrospectivos , Masculino , Colectomia/métodos , Colectomia/efeitos adversos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Fatores de Tempo , Cidade de Nova Iorque , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: When pregnant patients present with nonobstetric pathology, the physicians caring for them may be uncertain about the optimal management strategy. The aim of this guideline is to develop evidence-based recommendations for pregnant patients presenting with common surgical pathologies including appendicitis, biliary disease, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). METHODS: The Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Guidelines Committee convened a working group to address these issues. The group generated five key questions and completed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. An expert panel then met to form evidence-based recommendations according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Expert opinion was utilized when the available evidence was deemed insufficient. RESULTS: The expert panel agreed on ten recommendations addressing the management of appendicitis, biliary disease, and IBD during pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Conditional recommendations were made in favor of appendectomy over nonoperative treatment of appendicitis, laparoscopic appendectomy over open appendectomy, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy over nonoperative treatment of biliary disease and acute cholecystitis specifically. Based on expert opinion, the panel also suggested either operative or nonoperative treatment of biliary diseases other than acute cholecystitis in the third trimester, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography rather than common bile duct exploration for symptomatic choledocholithiasis, applying the same criteria for emergent surgical intervention in pregnant and non-pregnant IBD patients, utilizing an open rather than minimally invasive approach for pregnant patients requiring emergent surgical treatment of IBD, and managing pregnant patients with active IBD flares in a multidisciplinary fashion at centers with IBD expertise.