Is Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection for Colorectal Lesions Performed in the Endoscopy Suite Safe and Cost Saving?

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare the outcomes and the cost differences of endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) procedures in the endoscopy suite (ES) versus the operating room (OR). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The procedures in the OR were compared with procedures performed in the ES for demographics, lesion characteristics, procedure outcome, and procedure charges. The study included 163 procedures in the ES and 73 in the OR. RESULTS: Both were similar in age, sex, body mass index, and intraprocedural and postoperative 30-day (late) complications. ES cases had significantly greater polyp size, were more commonly right-sided polyps, and had shorter hospital stays, with similar en bloc and margin-negative resection rates. The overall cost ratio of ESD procedures in ES to OR was 0.47 ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Colorectal ESD procedures performed in the ES have similar efficacy and safety as those in the OR. Procedures performed in the ES were associated with a shorter length of stay and significant periprocedural cost savings.

Cost-Effectiveness of Aspirin for Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Major Surgery for Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Venous thromboembolism extended prophylaxis after inflammatory bowel disease surgery remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if adopting an aspirin-based prophylaxis strategy may address current cost-effectiveness limitations. METHODS: A decision analysis model was used to compare costs and outcomes of a reference case patient undergoing inflammatory bowel disease-associated colorectal surgery considered for post-discharge thromboembolism prophylaxis. Low-dose aspirin was compared to an enoxaparin regimen as well as no prophylaxis. Source estimates were obtained from aggregated existing literature. Secondary analysis included out-of-pocket costs. A 10,000-simulation Monte Carlo probabilistic sensitivity analysis accounted for uncertainty in model estimates. RESULTS: An enoxaparin-based regimen compared to aspirin demonstrated an unfavorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $908,268 per quality-adjusted life year. Sensitivity analysis supported this finding in > 75% of simulated cases; scenarios favoring enoxaparin included those with > 4% post-discharge event rates. Aspirin versus no prophylaxis demonstrated a favorable ratio of $106,601 per quality-adjusted life year. Findings were vulnerable to a post-discharge thromboembolism rate < 1%, aspirin-associated bleeding rate > 1%, median hospital costs of bleeding > 3 × , and decreased efficacy of aspirin (RR > 0.75). The average out-of-pocket cost of choosing an aspirin ePpx strategy increased by $54 per patient versus $708 per patient with enoxaparin. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose aspirin extended prophylaxis following inflammatory bowel disease surgery has a favorable cost-safety profile and may be an attractive alternative approach.

Outcomes and Cost Analysis of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Abdominoperineal Resection for Rectal Cancer: A Case-Matched Study.

BACKGROUND: Although laparoscopy for abdominoperineal resection has been well defined, the literature lacks comparative studies on robotic abdominoperineal resection. Because robotic abdominoperineal resections typically do not require splenic mobilization or an anastomosis for reconstruction, the mean console time is expected to be shorter than low anterior resection. We hypothesized that robotic and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection would provide similar oncologic and financial outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the perioperative, oncologic, and economic outcomes of the robotic and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection. DESIGN: This was a retrospective, case-matched patient cohort. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary referral center. PATIENTS: This study included all patients who underwent either laparoscopic or robotic abdominoperineal resections between January 2008 and April 2017; they were case-matched in a 1:1 ratio based on age ±5 years, BMI ±3 kg/m 2 , and sex criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative, oncologic, and economic (including survival) outcomes were compared. Because of institutional policy, actual cost values are presented as the lowest direct cost value as "100%," and other values are presented as proportional to the index value. RESULTS: We examined 68 patients (34 in each group). Both groups had similar preoperative characteristics, including preoperative chemoradiation rates. Operative time (319 vs 309 min), length of stay (7.2 vs 7.4 d), postoperative complications (38.2% vs 41.2%), conversion to open (5 vs 4), complete mesorectal excision (76.4% vs 79.4%), radial margin involvement (2.9% vs 8.9%), and direct hospital cost parameters (mean difference 26%, median difference 43%) were comparable between robotic and laparoscopic abdominoperineal resection groups, respectively (all p > 0.05). Local recurrence, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates (85.3% vs 76.5%) were also similar after 22 months of follow-up between the groups. LIMITATIONS: The main limitations of this study are its retrospective nature and the variety in concomitant procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Robotic abdominoperineal resections provided in carefully matched patients with rectal cancer showed similar perioperative and short-term oncologic outcomes compared to laparoscopic abdominoperineal resections. Our study was not powered to detect a significant increase in cost with robotic abdominoperineal resections. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B920 . RESULTADOS Y ANLISIS DE COSTO DE LA RESECCIN ABDOMINOPERINEAL LAPAROSCPICA VS LA ROBTICA EN CASOS DE CNCER DE RECTO ESTUDIO DE CASOS EMPAREJADOS: ANTECEDENTES:Si bien la resección abdominoperineal laparoscópica está bien definida, la literatura carece de estudios comparativos sobre la resección abdominoperineal robótica. Dado que las resecciones abdominoperineales robóticas generalmente no requieren movilización esplénica o una anastomosis en casos de reconstrucción, se supone que el tiempo medio en la consola sea más corto que durante una resección anterior baja. Hipotéticamente las resecciones abdominoperineales robóticas y laparoscópicas nos proporcionarían resultados oncológicos y económicos similares.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados perioperatorios, oncológicos y económicos de la resección abdominoperineal robótica y laparoscópica.DISEÑO:Esta fue una cohorte de pacientes retrospectiva, emparejada por casos.AJUSTE:Estudio realizado en un centro de referencia terciario.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resecciones abdominoperineales LAParoscópicas o ROBóticas entre Enero de 2008 y Abril de 2017 fueron identificados y emparejados según la edad ±5, el IMC ±3 y los criterios de sexo en una proporción de 1:1.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se compararon los resultados perioperatorios, oncológicos y económicos (incluida la sobrevida). Debido a la política institucional, los valores de costos reales se presentan como el valor de costo directo más bajo al 100% y los otros valores se presentan como proporcionales al valor índice.RESULTADOS:Se analizaron 68 pacientes (LAP-34 y ROB-34). Ambos grupos tenían características preoperatorias similares, incluidas las tasas de radio-quimioterapia pre-operatoria. Los tiempos operatorios fueron de 319 y 309 minutos, la estadía hospitalaria de 7 días en los dos grupos, las complicaciones post-operatorias fueron de 38,2% LAP frente a 41,2% ROB, la tasa de conversion fué de 5 a 4, la excisión total del mesorrecto de 76,4% frente a 79,4%, la resección radial con afectación de los márgenes de 2,9% frente a 8,9% y los parámetros de costes hospitalarios directos (diferencia de medias 26%, diferencia de medianas 43%) fueron comparables entre los grupos, de resección abdominoperineal robótica y laparoscópica, respectivamente (todos p > 0,05). Las tasas de recurrencia local, sobrevida libre de enfermedad y sobrevida general (85,3% frente a 76,5%) también fueron similares después de 22 meses de seguimiento entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:La naturaleza retrospectiva y la variedad de procedimientos concomitantes fueron las principales limitaciones de este estudio.CONCLUSIONES:Las resecciones abdominoperineales robóticas proporcionaron resultados oncológicos perioperatorios y a corto plazo similares en pacientes con cáncer de recto cuidadosamente emparejados en comparación con las resecciones abdominoperineales laparoscópicas. Nuestro estudio no fue diseñado para detectar un aumento significativo en el costo relacionado con la resección abdominoperineal robótica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B920 . (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Cost-conscious robotic restorative proctectomy has similar economic and oncologic outcomes to open restorative proctectomy: Results of a long-term follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we hypothesised that the direct hospital costs of robotic restorative proctectomy (RP) would be similar to those of open RP when a cost-conscious approach was employed in rectal cancer patients. METHODS: We included consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent RP between 12/2011 and 10/2014. A cost-conscious approach was employed in robotic surgery. We compared demographics, long-term oncologic outcomes, and direct hospital costs between the open and robotic groups. RESULTS: There were 32 robotic and 68 open RP procedures performed. Compared to open RP, the robotic RP group had a longer operative time but less estimated blood loss, intraoperative transfusions, overall short-term morbidity, decreased length of stay. After the initial five robotic cases, overall hospital costs were comparable between the groups (1 ± 0.5 vs. 1 ± 0.4, open and robotic RP, respectively, p = 0.90). CONCLUSION: Increasing surgeon experience and a cost-conscious approach may improve the value of care of robotic RP in patients with rectal cancer.

Defining the Economic Burden of Perioperative Venous Thromboembolism in Inflammatory Bowel Disease in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Patients with IBD are at increased risk of venous thromboembolism. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to define the economic burden associated with inpatient venous thromboembolism after surgery for IBD that presently remains undefined. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis using the National Inpatient Sample from 2004 to 2014. SETTING: Participating hospitals across the United States were sampled. PATIENTS: The International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision codes were used to identify patients with a primary diagnosis of IBD. INTERVENTIONS: Major abdominopelvic bowel surgery was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the occurrence of inpatient venous thromboembolism. Univariate and multivariable patient- and hospital-level logistic regression models were used to compare patient characteristics, hospital characteristics, and outcomes between venous thromboembolism and non-venous thromboembolism cohorts. Total average direct costs were then compared between cohorts, and the resulting difference was extrapolated to the national population. RESULTS: Of 26,080 patients included, inpatient venous thromboembolism was identified in 581 (2.2%). On multivariable analysis, diagnosis of ulcerative colitis, transfer status, length of preoperative hospitalization, and insurance status were independently associated with inpatient venous thromboembolism. Patients with venous thromboembolism were observed to be associated with an increased median length of stay (17.6 vs 6.7 days; p < 0.001) and higher inpatient mortality (5.0% vs 1.1%; OR 4.7, SE 3.2-7.0; p < 0.001). After adjusting for clinically relevant covariates, the additional cost associated with each inpatient venous thromboembolism was $31,551 (95% CI, $29,136-$33,965). LIMITATIONS: Our study is limited by the administrative nature of the National Inpatient Sample database, which limits our ability to evaluate the impact of clinical covariates (eg, use of venous thromboembolism chemoprophylaxis, steroid use, and nutrition status). CONCLUSION: Inpatient venous thromboembolism in abdominopelvic surgery for IBD is an infrequent, yet costly, morbid complication. Given the magnitude of patient morbidity and economic burden, venous thromboembolism prevention should be a national quality improvement and research priority. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B544. DEFINICIN IMPACTO ECONMICO DE LA TROMBOEMBOLIA VENOSA PERIOPERATORIA EN LA ENFERMEDAD INFLAMATORIA INTESTINAL EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS: ANTECEDENTES:Pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (EII) tienen un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso (TEV).OBJETIVO:Definir el impacto económico de TEV hospitalaria después de la cirugía por EII, que en la actualidad permanece indefinida.DISEÑO:Un análisis transversal retrospectivo utilizando la Muestra Nacional de Pacientes Internos (NIS) de 2004 a 2014.ENTORNO CLINICO:Hospitales participantes muestreados en los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Se utilizaron los códigos de la 9ª edición de la Clasificación Internacional de Enfermedades (ICD-9) para identificar a los pacientes con diagnóstico primario de EII.INTERVENCIONES:Cirugía mayor abdominopélvica intestinal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Incidencia de TEV en pacientes hospitalizados, utilizando modelos de regresión logística univariado y multivariable a nivel de pacientes y hospitales para comparar las características de los pacientes, las características del hospital y los resultados entre las cohortes de TEV y no TEV. Se compararon los costos directos promedio totales entre cohortes y la diferencia resultante extrapolando a la población nacional.RESULTADOS:De 26080 pacientes incluidos, se identificó TEV hospitalario en 581 (2,2%). En análisis multivariable, el diagnóstico de colitis ulcerosa, el estado de transferencia (entre centros hospitalarios), la duración de la hospitalización preoperatoria y el nivel de seguro medico se asociaron de forma independiente con la TEV hospitalaria. Se observó que los pacientes con TEV se asociaron con un aumento de la duración media de la estancia (17,6 versus a 6,7 días; p <0,001) y una mayor mortalidad hospitalaria (5,0% versus a 1,1%; OR 4,7, SE 3,2 -7,0; p <0,001). Después de ajustar las covariables clínicamente relevantes, el costo adicional asociado con cada TEV para pacientes hospitalizados fue de $ 31,551 USD (95% C.I. $ 29,136 - $ 33,965).LIMITACIONES:Estudio limitado por la naturaleza administrativa de la base de datos del NIS, que limita nuestra capacidad para evaluar el impacto de las covariables clínicas (por ejemplo, el uso de quimioprofilaxis de TEV, el uso de esteroides y el estado nutricional).CONCLUSIÓN:TEV hospitalaria en la cirugía abdominopélvica para la EII es una complicación mórbida infrecuente, pero costosa. Debido a la magnitud de la morbilidad el impacto económico, la prevención del TEV debería ser una prioridad de investigación y para mejoría de calidad a nivel nacional. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B544.

Perfusion Assessment in Left-Sided/Low Anterior Resection (PILLAR III): A Randomized, Controlled, Parallel, Multicenter Study Assessing Perfusion Outcomes With PINPOINT Near-Infrared Fluorescence Imaging in Low Anterior Resection.

BACKGROUND: Indocyanine green fluoroscopy has been shown to improve anastomotic leak rates in early phase trials. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that the use of fluoroscopy to ensure anastomotic perfusion may decrease anastomotic leak after low anterior resection. DESIGN: We performed a 1:1 randomized controlled parallel study. Recruitment of 450 to 1000 patients was planned over 2 years. SETTINGS: This was a multicenter trial. PATIENTS: Included patients were those undergoing resection defined as anastomosis within 10 cm of the anal verge. INTERVENTION: Patients underwent standard evaluation of tissue perfusion versus standard in conjunction with perfusion evaluation using indocyanine green fluoroscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome was anastomotic leak, with secondary outcomes of perfusion assessment and the rate of postoperative abscess requiring intervention. RESULTS: This study was concluded early because of decreasing accrual rates. A total of 25 centers recruited 347 patients, of whom 178 were randomly assigned to perfusion and 169 to standard. The groups had comparable tumor-specific and patient-specific demographics. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation was performed in 63.5% of perfusion and 65.7% of standard (p > 0.05). Mean level of anastomosis was 5.2 ± 3.1 cm in perfusion compared with 5.2 ± 3.3 cm in standard (p > 0.05). Sufficient visualization of perfusion was reported in 95.4% of patients in the perfusion group. Postoperative abscess requiring surgical management was reported in 5.7% of perfusion and 4.2% of standard (p = 0.75). Anastomotic leak was reported in 9.0% of perfusion compared with 9.6% of standard (p = 0.37). On multivariate regression analysis, there was no difference in anastomotic leak rates between perfusion and standard (OR = 0.845 (95% CI, 0.375-1.905); p = 0.34). LIMITATIONS: The predetermined sample size to adequately reduce the risk of type II error was not achieved. CONCLUSIONS: Successful visualization of perfusion can be achieved with indocyanine green fluoroscopy. However, no difference in anastomotic leak rates was observed between patients who underwent perfusion assessment versus standard surgical technique. In experienced hands, the addition of routine indocyanine green fluoroscopy to standard practice adds no evident clinical benefit. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B560. VALORACIN DE LA IRRIGACIN DE LADO IZQUIERDO/RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA PILAR III UN ESTUDIO ALEATORIZADO, CONTROLADO, PARALELO Y MULTICNTRICO QUE EVALA LOS RESULTADOS DE LA IRRIGACIN CON PINPOINT IMGENES DE FLUORESCENCIA CERCANA AL INFRARROJO EN LA RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA: ANTECEDENTES:Se ha demostrado que la fluoroscopia con verde de indocianina mejora las tasas de fuga anastomótica en ensayos en fases iniciales.OBJETIVO:Nuestra hipótesis es que la utilización de fluoroscopia para asegurar la irrigación anastomótica puede disminuir la fuga anastomótica luego de una resección anterior baja.DISEÑO:Realizamos un estudio paralelo, controlado, aleatorizado 1:1. Se planificó el reclutamiento de 450-1000 pacientes durante 2 años.AMBITO:Multicéntrico.PACIENTES:Pacientes sometidos a resección definida como una anastomosis dentro de los 10cm del margen anal.INTERVENCIÓN:Pacientes que se sometieron a la evaluación estándar de la irrigación tisular contra la estándar en conjunto con la valoración de la irrigación mediante fluoroscopia con verde indocianina.PRINCIPALES VARIABLES EVALUADAS:El principal resultado fue la fuga anastomótica, y los resultados secundarios fueron la evaluación de la perfusión y la tasa de absceso posoperatorio que requirió intervención.RESULTADOS:Este estudio se cerró anticipadamente debido a la disminución de las tasas de acumulación. Un total de 25 centros reclutaron a 347 pacientes, de los cuales 178 fueron, de manera aleatoria, asignados a perfusión y 169 a estándar. Los grupos tenían datos demográficos específicos del tumor y del paciente similares. Recibieron quimio-radioterapia neoadyuvante el 63,5% de la perfusión y el 65,7% del estándar (p> 0,05). La anastomosis estuvo en un nivel promedio de 5,2 + 3,1 cm en perfusión en comparación con 5,2 + 3,3 cm en estándar (p> 0,05). Se reportó una visualización suficiente de la perfusión en el 95,4% de los pacientes del grupo de perfusión. El absceso posoperatorio que requirió tratamiento quirúrgico fue de 5,7% de los perfusion y en el 4,2% del estándar (p = 0,75). Se informó fuga anastomótica en el 9,0% de la perfusión en comparación con el 9,6% del estándar (p = 0,37). En el análisis de regresión multivariante, no hubo diferencias en las tasas de fuga anastomótica entre la perfusión y el estándar (OR 0,845; IC del 95% (0,375; 1,905); p = 0,34).LIMITACIONES:No se logró el tamaño de muestra predeterminado para reducir satisfactoriamente el riesgo de error tipo II.CONCLUSIÓN:Se puede obtener una visualización adecuada de la perfusión con ICG-F. Sin embargo, no se observaron diferencias en las tasas de fuga anastomótica entre los pacientes que se sometieron a evaluación de la perfusión versus la técnica quirúrgica estándar. En manos expertas, agregar ICG-F a la rutina de la práctica estándar no agrega ningún beneficio clínico evidente. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B560. (Traducción-Dr Juan Antonio Villanueva-Herrero).

Intraoperative Colonoscopy During Colorectal Surgery Does Not Increase Postoperative Complications: An Assessment From the ACS-NSQIP Procedure-targeted Cohort.

Intraoperative colonoscopy (IOC) is an adjunct in colorectal surgery to detect the location of the lesions and assessing anastomotic integrity. The authors aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility and postoperative morbidity of IOC in left-sided colectomy patients for colorectal cancer. Patients undergoing elective left-sided colectomy without any proximal diversion for colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2016 were reviewed from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program procedure-targeted database. Demographics, comorbidities, short-term outcomes, and postoperative morbidity of patients were evaluated. A total of 8811 patients were identified and IOC was performed for 1143 (12.97%) patients. There was no significant difference in postoperative complications between the IOC and non-IOC groups. Patients with IOC had shorter total hospital length of stay. The use of IOC does not adversely affect short-term outcomes after colorectal resections. Surgeons may utilize IOC liberally for left-sided colorectal resections.

Enhanced Recovery Pathway Benefits Patients Undergoing Nonelective Colorectal Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of our study was to determine if an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) can successfully be applied in nonelective colorectal surgery. BACKGROUND: ERPs have been shown to reduce hospital length of stay (LOS), complications, and costs after elective colorectal surgery. Yet, little data exist regarding the benefits of ERPs in patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery. We hypothesized that ERP implementation in a nonelective colorectal surgery population is associated with decreased postoperative LOS. METHODS: A prospectively-maintained database was used to identify consecutive patients undergoing colorectal surgery after emergency room (ER) or hospital transfer admissions over a period from 2 years before until 1 year after implementation of a comprehensive ERP. The primary endpoint was LOS. Secondary endpoints included total LOS [TLOS = postoperative LOS + LOS of readmission(s)], readmission rates, complication rates, 30-day mortality, and hospital costs. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to assess the relationship between ERP implementation and LOS. RESULTS: We identified 269 pre-ERP and 135 ERP patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria. Admit source (ER 43.4% vs transfers 56.7%), Charlson comorbidity index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status, diagnosis (inflammatory bowel disease 45.8%, malignancy 19.6%, benign intestinal obstructions 10.4%, diverticulitis 9.4%, others 10.4%), and blood loss were comparable (P > 0.05) between the cohorts. Pre-ERP patients had a higher number of previous abdominal surgeries, whereas post-ERP patients had more laparoscopy and more compliance with ERP elements. ERP patients had a shorter postoperative LOS [6 (4, 10) vs 7 (5, 12) days; P = 0.0007]. Hospital costs were 13.4% lower (P = 0.004). Postoperative 30-day morbidity, mortality, and readmissions were comparable, although reoperation rate was higher in the ERP group. On multivariate analysis, ERP implementation and laparoscopy were the only modifiable variables independently associated with shorter LOS, whereas longer operative times and higher ASA classification were associated with longer LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing nonelective colorectal surgery after ER or hospital transfer admission benefit from the use of an ERP, demonstrating decreased LOS and costs without an increase in complications.

Evaluation of Factors Associated With Successful Matriculation to Colon and Rectal Surgery Fellowship.

BACKGROUND: As an increasing number of general surgery residents apply for fellowship positions, it is important to identify factors associated with successful matriculation. For applicants to colon and rectal surgery, there are currently no objective data available to distinguish which applicant attributes lead to successful matriculation. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify objective factors that differentiate colon and rectal surgery fellowship applicants who successfully matriculate with those who apply but do not matriculate. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of colon and rectal surgery applicant characteristics. SETTINGS: Deidentified applicant data provided by the Association of American Medical Colleges from 2015 to 2017 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Applicant demographics, medical school and residency factors, number of program applications, number of publications, and journal impact factors were analyzed to determine associations with successful matriculation. RESULTS: Most applicants (n = 371) and subsequent matriculants (n = 248) were white (61%, 62%), male (65%, 63%), US citizens (80%, 88%) who graduated from US allopathic medical schools (66%, 75%). Statistically significant associations included graduation from US allopathic medical schools (p < 0.0001), US citizenship (p < 0.0001), and number of program applications (p = 0.0004). Other factors analyzed included American Osteopathic Association membership (p = 0.57), university-based residency (p = 0.51), and residency association with a colon and rectal surgery training program (p = 0.89). Number of publications and journal impact factors were not statistically different between cohorts (p = 0.067, p = 0.150). LIMITATIONS: American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination scores, rank list, and subjective characteristics, such as strength of interview and letters of recommendation, were not available using our data source. CONCLUSIONS: Successful matriculation to a colon and rectal surgery fellowship program was found to be associated with US citizenship, graduation from a US allopathic medical school, and greater number of program applications. The remaining objective metrics analyzed were not associated with successful matriculation. Subjective and objective factors that were unable to be measured by this study are likely to play a determining role. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B415. EVALUACIN DE FACTORES VINCULADOS EN LA INMATRICULACIN EXITOSA PARA BECAS DE CIRUGA COLORRECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:A medida que un número cada vez mayor de residentes de Cirugía General solicitan una beca, es importante identificar los factores vinculados con una inmatriculación exitosa. Para los candidatos a una beca en Cirugía Colorrectal, hoy en día no existen datos objetivos disponibles para distinguir qué atributos del solicitante conducen a una inmatriculación exitosa.OBJETIVO:Identificar objetivamente los factores que diferencian un candidato a una beca en Cirugía Colorrectal que se inmatricula con éxito de aquel que aplica pero no llega a inmatricularse.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de las características de los solicitantes de beca para Cirugía Colorrecatl.AJUSTES:Datos de los solicitantes no identificados, proporcionados por la Asociación de Colegios Médicos Estadounidenses de 2015 a 2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se analizaron los factores demográficos del solicitante, las facultades de medicina y los factores de la residencia, el número de solicitudes de programas, el número y el factor de impacto de las publicaciones realizadas para determinar la asociación con una inmatriculación exitosa.RESULTADOS:La mayoría de los solicitantes (n = 371) que posteriormente fueron inmatriculados exitosamente (n = 248) eran blancos (61%, 62%, respectivamente), hombres (65%, 63%), ciudadanos estadounidenses (80%, 88%) que se graduaron de Facultades de medicina alopática en los EE. UU. (66%, 75%). Las asociaciones estadísticamente significativas incluyeron la graduación de las escuelas de medicina alopática de los EE. UU. (P <0,0001), la ciudadanía de los EE. UU. (P <0,0001) y el número de solicitudes de programas (p = 0,0004). Otros factores analizados incluyeron: membresía AOA (p = 0,57), la residencia universitaria (p = 0,51) y asociación de la residencia con un programa de formación en Cirugía Colorrectal (p = 0,89). El número de publicaciones y los factores de impacto de las revistas no fueron estadísticamente diferentes entre las cohortes (p = 0,067, p = 0,15, respectivamente).LIMITACIONES:El Score ABSITE, la posición en lista de clasificación y las características subjetivas como el de una buena entrevista y las cartas de recomendación no se encontraban disponibles en la fuente de datos.CONCLUSIONES:Se encontró que la inmatriculación exitosa a un programa de becas de Cirugía Colorreectal estaba asociada con la ciudadanía estadounidense, la graduación en una Facultad de medicina alopática en los EE. UU, y al mayor número de solicitudes de programas. El analisis de las medidas objetivas restantes no se asociaron con una inmatriculación exitosa. Es probable que los factores subjetivos y objetivos que no pudieron ser medidos por este estudio jueguen un papel determinante. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B415. (Traducción-Dr Xavier Delgadillo).

A Paradigm Shift in Physician Reimbursement: A Model to Align Reimbursement to Value in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Despite common beliefs, underuse of laparoscopic colorectal surgery remains an issue. A paradigm shift to increase laparoscopy and align payment with effort is needed, with pressures to improve value. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare reimbursement across surgical approach and payer for common colorectal procedures and to propose a novel way to increase use in the United States. DATA SOURCES: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (Medicare) reimbursement and commercial claims data from 2012 to 2015 were used. STUDY SELECTION: Reimbursement across payers was mapped for the 10 most common colorectal procedures using the open and laparoscopic approaches. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The reimbursement difference across approaches by payer and potential value proposition from a cost-shifting model increasing reimbursement with corresponding increases in laparoscopic use was measured. RESULTS: For Medicare, reimbursement was lower laparoscopically than open for the majority. With commercial, laparoscopy was reimbursed less for 3 procedures. When laparoscopic reimbursement was higher, the amount was not substantial. Medicare payments were consistently lower than commercial, with corresponding lower reimbursement for laparoscopy. Increasing reimbursement by 10%, 20%, and 30% resulted in significant cost savings with laparoscopy. Savings were amplified with increasing use, with additional savings over baseline at all levels, except 30% reimbursement/10% increased use. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by the use of claims data, which could have coding errors and confounding in the case mix across approaches. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement for laparoscopic colorectal surgery is comparatively lower than open. Reimbursement can be increased with significant overall cost savings, as the reimbursement/case is still less than total cost savings with laparoscopy compared with open cases. Incentivizing surgeons toward laparoscopy could drive use and improve outcomes, cost, and quality as we shift to value-based payment. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B290. CAMBIOS EN LOS PARADIGMAS DE REEMBOLSOS MÉDICOS: UN MODELO PARA ALINEAR EL REEMBOLSO AL VALOR REAL DE LA CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA EN LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS: A pesar de las creencias comunes, la subutilización de la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica sigue siendo un problema. Se necesita un cambio en los paradigmas para aumentar y alinear el rembolso de la laparoscopia aplicando mucho esfuerzo para obtener una mejoría en su valor real.Comparar los reembolsos del abordaje quirúrgico y los de la administración para procedimientos colorrectales comunes y proponer una nueva forma de aumentar su uso en los Estados Unidos.Reembolsos en los Centros de Servicios de Medicare y Medicaid (Medicare) y los datos de reclamos comerciales encontrados de 2012-2015.El reembolso administrativo se mapeó para los diez procedimientos colorrectales más comunes utilizando los enfoques abiertos y laparoscópicos.Diferencias de reembolso entre los enfoques por parte de la administración y la propuesta de valor real de un modelo de cambio de costos que aumentan el reembolso con los aumentos correspondientes si se utiliza la laparoscopía.Para Medicare, el reembolso fue menor para una mayoría por vía laparoscópica que abierta. Comercialmente, la laparoscopia se reembolsó menos por 3 procedimientos. Cuando el reembolso laparoscópico fue mayor, la cantidad no fue sustancial. Los pagos de Medicare fueron consistentemente más bajos que los pagos comerciales, con el correspondiente reembolso más bajo por laparoscopia. El aumento del reembolso en un 10%, 20% y 30% resultó en ahorros de costos significativos con la laparoscopía. Los ahorros se amplificaron con el aumento de la utilización, con ahorros adicionales sobre la línea de base en todos los niveles, excepto el 30% de reembolso / 10% de mayor uso.Uso de datos de reclamos, que podrían tener errores de codificación y confusión en la combinación de casos entre enfoques.El reembolso por la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica es comparativamente más bajo que el abordaje abierto. El reembolso se puede aumentar con ahorros significativos en los costos generales, ya que el reembolso / caso es aún menor que el ahorro total en los costos de la laparoscopia en comparación con los casos abiertos. Incentivar a los cirujanos hacia la laparoscopía podría impulsar la utilización y mejorar los resultados, el costo y la calidad a medida que se pasa al pago basado en el valor real. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B290. (Traducción-Dr Xavier Delgadillo).

Do Patients With Inflammatory Bowel Disease Benefit from an Enhanced Recovery Pathway?

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) have been shown to reduce length of stay (LOS), complications, and costs after colorectal surgery; yet, little data exists regarding patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We hypothesized that implementation of ERP for IBD patients is associated with shorter LOS and improved economic outcomes. METHODS: An IRB-approved prospective clinical database was used to identify consecutive patients from 2015 to 2017. Patients were grouped as "pre-ERP" and "post-ERP" based on the date of implementation of a comprehensive ERP. Ileostomy closures, redo pouch operations, and outpatient operations were excluded. The relationship between ERP, LOS, and secondary outcomes was assessed using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Overall, a total of 671 patients were included: 345 (51.4%) with Crohn's disease (CD) and 326 (48.6%) with ulcerative colitis (UC). Of these, 425 were pre-ERP (63.4%), and 246 were post-ERP (36.6%). The groups did not differ in terms of age, gender, American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores, comorbidities, estimated blood loss, or ostomy construction. The post-ERP group had a significantly higher mean body mass index (BMI), more patients with CD, longer operative time, and more minimally invasive surgery (MIS; all P < 0.05). The post-ERP group had a significantly shorter LOS (6 vs 4.5 days, median), whereas mean hospital costs decreased by 15.7%. There was no difference in readmissions or complications. On multivariate analysis, MIS and ERP use were both associated with a shorter LOS. CONCLUSION: Inflammatory bowel disease patients benefit from the use of ERP, demonstrating decreased LOS and costs without an increase in complications and readmissions. Enhanced recovery pathways should be routinely implemented in this often challenging patient population.

Extended Venous Thromboembolism Prophylaxis After Elective Surgery for IBD Patients: Nomogram-Based Risk Assessment and Prediction from Nationwide Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Identification of risk factors for postoperative venous thromboembolism is an important step to reduce the morbidity associated with this potentially preventable complication after elective surgery for patients with IBD. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the risk factors for 30-day venous thromboembolism after abdominal surgery for patients with venous thromboembolism, identify potential indications for extended thromboprophylaxis, and develop a nomogram for prediction of risk. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study from a prospectively collected database. SETTING: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant User File from 2005 to 2016 was used for data analysis. PATIENTS: All patients with IBD undergoing elective abdominopelvic bowel surgery were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes were the incidence of in-hospital and postdischarge venous thromboembolism within 30 days of the index abdominopelvic surgery. RESULTS: A total of 24,182 patients met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-day total and postdischarge rates of venous thromboembolism were 2.5% (n = 614) and 1% (n =252). Forty-one percent (252/614) of venous thromboembolism events occurred after hospital discharge. Univariate analysis assessed 37 variables for association with study outcomes. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, older age, steroid use, bleeding disorders, open surgery, hypertension, longer operative time, and preoperative hospitalization were associated with venous thromboembolism before discharge and also postoperative transfusion, steroid use, pelvic and enterocutaneous fistula surgery, and longer operative time were associated with venous thromboembolism after discharge. A nomogram was constructed for each outcome, translating multivariate model parameter estimates into a visual scoring system where the estimated probability of venous thromboembolism can be calculated. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective nature and the limitations inherent to a database. CONCLUSION: Given the higher risk of venous thromboembolism in patients with IBD after elective abdominopelvic surgery compared with other indications, an accurate prediction of venous thromboembolism before and after discharge using the proposed nomogram can facilitate decision making for individualized extended thromboprophylaxis in the preoperative setting as a screening tool. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A711.

Are we taking a risk with risk assessment tools? Evaluating the relationship between NSQIP and the ACS risk calculator in colorectal surgery.

GOAL: To evaluate the relationship between the ACS Risk Calculator and NSQIP expected outcomes in elective colorectal resections. METHODS: The 2015 NSQIP morbidity report for elective colorectal procedures at a single institution was evaluated. Risk Calculator (RC) reports were completed for predicted risk. Correlation coefficients were calculated for the general relationship between the tools for complications. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves compared the predictive accuracy of the tools to actual outcome measures of any complication, serious complications, readmissions, unplanned return to the operating room, and mortality. RESULTS: There was high correlation between NSQIP and the RC for any complication, but low correlation for serious complications. Predictive accuracy of both tools for identifying actual occurrences was poor, with area under the ROC<0.60 for all metrics with both tools, except NSQIP mortality, which had good accuracy. CONCLUSIONS: The tools were highly correlated for predicting complications in general, but neither was accurate for predicting actual outcomes. As underestimating risk and complications could have financial implications under value-based care, refinement could benefit informed consent and quality improvement at the institutional level.

Colorectal Cancer Safety Net: Is It Catching Patients Appropriately?

BACKGROUND: Disparities in access to colorectal cancer care are multifactorial and are affected by socioeconomic elements. Uninsured and Medicaid patients present with advanced stage disease and have worse outcomes compared with similar privately insured patients. Safety net hospitals are a major care provider to this vulnerable population. Few studies have evaluated outcomes for safety net hospitals compared with private institutions in colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare demographics, screening rates, presentation stage, and survival rates between a safety net hospital and a tertiary care center. DESIGN: Comparative review of patients at 2 institutions in the same metropolitan area were conducted. SETTINGS: The study included colorectal cancer care delivered either at 1 safety net hospital or 1 private tertiary care center in the same city from 2010 to 2016. PATIENTS: A total of 350 patients with colorectal cancer from each hospital were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival across hospital systems was measured. RESULTS: The safety net hospital had significantly more uninsured and Medicaid patients (46% vs 13%; p < 0.001) and a significantly lower median household income than the tertiary care center ($39,299 vs $49,741; p < 0.0001). At initial presentation, a similar percentage of patients at each hospital presented with stage IV disease (26% vs 20%; p = 0.06). For those undergoing resection, final pathologic stage distribution was similar across groups (p = 0.10). After a comparable median follow-up period (26.6 mo for safety net hospital vs 29.2 mo for tertiary care center), log-rank test for overall survival favored the safety net hospital (p = 0.05); disease-free survival was similar between hospitals (p = 0.40). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective review, reporting from medical charts. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the value of safety net hospitals for providing quality colorectal cancer care, with survival and recurrence outcomes equivalent or improved compared with a local tertiary care center. Because safety net hospitals can provide equivalent outcomes despite socioeconomic inequalities and financial constraints, emphasis should be focused on ensuring that adequate funding for these institutions continues. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A454.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Assessment Tool for Performance of Laparoscopic Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: The lack of consensus for performance assessment of laparoscopic colorectal resection is a major impediment to quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the validity of an evaluation tool for laparoscopic colectomy that is feasible for wide implementation. DESIGN: During the pilot phase, a small group of experts modified previous assessment tools by watching videos for laparoscopic right colectomy with the following categories of experience: novice (less than 20 cases), intermediate (50-100 cases), and expert (more than 500 cases). After achieving sufficient reliability (κ > 0.8), a user-friendly tool was validated among a large group of blinded, trained experts. SETTING: The study was conducted through the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Operative Competency Evaluation Committee. PATIENTS: Raters were from the Operative Competency Evaluation Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment tool reliability and internal consistency were measured. RESULTS: From October 2014 through February 2015, 4 groups of 5 raters blinded to surgeon skill level evaluated 6 different laparoscopic right colectomy videos (novice = 2, intermediate = 2, expert = 2). The overall Cronbach α was 0.98 (>0.9 = excellent internal consistency). The intraclass correlation for the overall assessment was 0.93 (range, 0.77-0.93) and was >0.74 (excellent) for each step. The average scores (scale, 1-5) for experts were significantly better than those in the intermediate category, with a mean (SD) of 4.51 (0.56) versus 2.94 (0.56; p = 0.003). Videos in the intermediate group scored more favorably than beginner videos for each individual step and overall performance (mean (SD) = 3.00 (0.32) vs 1.78 (0.42); p = 0.006). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by rater bias to technique and style. CONCLUSIONS: The unique and robust methodology in this trial produced an assessment tool that was feasible for raters to use when assessing videotaped laparoscopic right hemicolectomies. The potential applications for this new tool are widespread, including both training and evaluation of competence at the attending level. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A369, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A370, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A371.

Reprocessed bipolar energy for laparoscopic colectomy: Is it worth it?

BACKGROUND: Reprocessed (re-sterilized) bipolar energy devices represent one effort to reduce operative costs. METHODS: Between January 2014 to October 2015, 76 patients underwent laparoscopic colectomy using a reprocessed bipolar energy device and were case-matched to 76 patients from a prospectively-maintained database from November 2012 to December 2013 when an identical, new device was used. Outcomes included reprocessed device safety, efficiency and hospital costs. RESULTS: There was no difference in patient demographics, operative times or failed pedicle ligation requiring intervention between groups (all P > 0.05). In 19.7% of reprocessed cases, the surgeon opened an additional new device after dissatisfaction with the reprocessed instrument. Operating room costs and total costs were less for the reprocessed device group (all P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Reprocessed bipolar energy devices were associated with savings in operative expenses, however, larger studies are warranted due to the high surgeon dissatisfaction regarding safety concerns with the reprocessed equipment.

The impact of perianal disease in young patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Perianal disease is a potentially significant source of morbidity for patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We sought to identify the impact of perianal disease on IBD outcomes in children, adolescents, and young adults. METHODS: We studied 12,465 inpatient admissions for patients ≤20 years old with IBD in 2009 using the Kids' Inpatient Database (KID). Patients were stratified by their principal diagnosis of ulcerative colitis (UC) or Crohn's disease (CD). Perianal disease (perianal abscess, anal fissure, or anal fistula), complex fistulas (rectourethral, rectovaginal, or enterovesical), and growth failure were defined by ICD-9 codes. Logistic regression was performed adjusting for CD or UC, gender, age, need for surgical intervention, fistulas, or growth failure. RESULTS: Of the 511 (4.1%) patients with perianal disease, 480 had CD (94%, p < 0.001). Girls were less likely to suffer perianal disease (OR = 0.63, CI 0.52-0.76, p < 0.001). Those with perianal disease were more likely to suffer complex fistulas (OR = 3.5, CI 1.98-6.20, p < 0.001) but less likely to suffer enteroenteral fistulas (OR = 0.30, CI 0.15-0.63, p = 0.001) than those without perianal disease. Perianal disease did not increase the incidence of growth failure (p = 0.997) but doubled the likelihood of an operation of any type during admission (p < 0.001). Additionally, patients with perianal disease spent on average 1.29 more days in the hospital (7.45 vs. 6.16 days, p < 0.001) and accrued $5838 extra in hospital charges (p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Perianal disease in younger patients is associated with a longer length of stay, higher hospital charges, and increased rates of both perineal and abdominal operative procedures. These data support the notion that, similar to adults, the presence of perianal disease in pediatric Crohn's patients is associated with a more severe course.