Associations of Race, Ethnicity, and Social Determinants of Health With Colorectal Cancer Screening.

BACKGROUND: Racial and ethnic disparities in receipt of recommended colorectal cancer screening exist; however, the impact of social determinants of health on such disparities has not been recently studied in a national cohort. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether social determinants of health attenuate racial disparities in receipt of colorectal cancer screening. DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional telephone survey of self-reported race and ethnicity and up-to-date colorectal cancer screening. Associations between race/ethnicity and colorectal cancer screening were tested before and after adjustment for demographics, behavioral factors, and social determinants of health. SETTING: This was a nationally representative telephone survey of US residents in 2018. PATIENTS: The patients included were US residents aged 50 to 75 years. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was up-to-date colorectal cancer screening status, according to 2008 US Preventive Services Task Force recommendations. RESULTS: This study included 226,106 respondents aged 50 to 75 years. Before adjustment, all minority racial and ethnic groups demonstrated a significantly lower odds of screening than those of non-Hispanic white respondents. After adjustment for demographics, behavioral factors, and social determinants of health, compared to non-Hispanic white respondents, odds of screening were found to be increased among non-Hispanic black respondents (OR, 1.10; p = 0.02); lower but attenuated among Hispanic respondents (OR, 0.73; p < 0.001), non-Hispanic American Indian/Alaskan Native respondents (OR, 0.85; p = 0.048), and non-Hispanic respondents of other races (OR, 0.82; p = 0.01); and lower but not attenuated among non-Hispanic Asian respondents (OR, 0.68; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Recall bias, participant bias, and residual confounding. CONCLUSIONS: Adjustment for social determinants of health reduced racial and ethnic disparities in colorectal cancer screening among all minority racial and ethnic groups except non-Hispanic Asian individuals; however, other unmeasured confounders likely exist. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B977 . ASOCIACIN DE RAZA, ETNICIDAD Y DETERMINANTES SOCIALES DE LA SALUD CON LA DETECCIN DEL CNCER COLORRECTAL: ANTECEDENTES: Existen disparidades raciales y étnicas en la recepción de las pruebas recomendadas de detección de cáncer colorrectal; sin embargo, el impacto de los determinantes sociales de la salud en dichas disparidades no se ha estudiado recientemente en una cohorte nacional.OBJETIVO: El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar si los determinantes sociales de la salud atenúan las disparidades raciales en la recepción de pruebas de detección del cáncer colorrectal.DISEÑO: Encuesta telefónica transversal de raza y etnia autoinformada y detección actualizada de cáncer colorrectal. Las asociaciones entre la raza/etnicidad y la detección del cáncer colorrectal se probaron antes y después del ajuste por demografía, factores conductuales y determinantes sociales de la salud.ESCENARIO: Esta fue una encuesta telefónica representativa a nivel nacional de los residentes de EE. UU. en 2018.PACIENTES: Los pacientes eran residentes de EE. UU. de 50 a 75 años.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Estado actualizado de detección de cáncer colorrectal, según las recomendaciones del Grupo de Trabajo de Servicios Preventivos de EE. UU. de 2008.RESULTADOS: Este estudio incluyó a 226.106 encuestados de 50 a 75 años. Antes del ajuste, todos los grupos étnicos y raciales minoritarios demostraron probabilidades significativamente más bajas de detección en comparación con los encuestados blancos no hispanos. Después del ajuste por demografía, factores conductuales y determinantes sociales de la salud, en comparación con los encuestados blancos no hispanos, las probabilidades de detección aumentaron entre los encuestados negros no hispanos (OR 1,10, p = 0,02); más bajo pero atenuado entre los encuestados hispanos (OR 0,73, p < 0,001), los encuestados indios americanos/nativos de Alaska no hispanos (OR 0,85, p = 0,048) y los encuestados no hispanos de otras razas (OR 0,82, p = 0,01); y menor pero no atenuado entre los encuestados asiáticos no hispanos (OR 0,68, p < 0,001).LIMITACIONES: Sesgo de recuerdo y sesgo de participante, así como confusión residual.CONCLUSIONES: El ajuste para los determinantes sociales de la salud redujo las disparidades raciales y étnicas en la detección del cáncer colorrectal entre todos los grupos étnicos y raciales minoritarios, excepto las personas asiáticas no hispanas; sin embargo, es probable que existan otros factores de confusión no medidos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B977 . (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio ).

A pilot trial of vaccination with Carcinoembryonic antigen and Her2/neu peptides in advanced colorectal cancer.

Checkpoint-blockade therapy (CBT) is approved for select colorectal cancer (CRC) patents, but additional immunotherapeutic options are needed. We hypothesized that vaccination with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and Her2/neu (Her2) peptides would be immunogenic and well tolerated by participants with advanced CRC. A pilot clinical trial (NCT00091286) was conducted in HLA-A2+ or -A3+ Stage IIIC-IV CRC patients. Participants were vaccinated weekly with CEA and Her2 peptides plus tetanus peptide and GM-CSF emulsified in Montanide ISA-51 adjuvant for 3 weeks. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded per NIH Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3. Immunogenicity was evaluated by interferon-gamma ELISpot assay of in vitro sensitized peripheral blood mononuclear cells and lymphocytes from the sentinel immunized node. Eleven participants were enrolled and treated; one was retrospectively found to be ineligible due to HLA type. All 11 participants were included in AEs and survival analyses, and the 10 eligible participants were evaluated for immunogenicity. All participants reported AEs: 82% were Grade 1-2, most commonly fatigue or injection site reactions. Two participants (18%) experienced treatment-related dose-limiting Grade 3 AEs; both were self-limiting. Immune responses to Her2 or CEA peptides were detected in 70% of participants. Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months; among those enrolled with no evidence of disease (n = 3), median OS was not reached after 10 years of follow-up. These data demonstrate that vaccination with CEA or Her2 peptides is well tolerated and immunogenic. Further study is warranted to assess potential clinical benefits of vaccination in advanced CRC either alone or in combination with CBT.

Incidence and Characterization of Rectal Complications From Fecal Management Systems.

BACKGROUND: Fecal management systems have become ubiquitous in hospitalized patients with fecal incontinence or severe diarrhea, especially in the setting of perianal wounds. Although fecal management system use has been shown to be safe and effective in initial series, case reports of rectal ulceration and severe bleeding have been reported, with a relative paucity of clinical safety data in the literature. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the rate of rectal complications attributable to fecal management systems, as well as to characterize possible risk factors and appropriate management strategies for such complications. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: All medical and surgical patients who underwent fecal management system placement from December 2014 to March 2017 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured any rectal complication associated with fecal management system use, defined as any rectal injury identified after fecal management system use confirmed by lower endoscopy. RESULTS: A total of 629 patients were captured, with a median duration of fecal management system use of 4 days. Overall, 8 patients (1.3%) experienced a rectal injury associated with fecal management system use. All of the patients who experienced a rectal complication had severe underlying comorbidities, including 2 patients on dialysis, 1 patient with cirrhosis, and 3 patients with a recent history of emergent cardiac surgery. In 3 patients the bleeding resolved spontaneously, whereas the remaining 5 patients required intervention: transanal suture ligation (n = 2), endoscopic clip placement (n = 1), rectal packing (n = 1), and proctectomy in 1 patient with a history of pelvic radiotherapy. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective design and single institution. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to date evaluating rectal complications from fecal management system use. Although rectal injury rates are low, they can lead to serious morbidity. Advanced age, severe comorbidities, pelvic radiotherapy, and anticoagulation status or coagulopathy are important factors to consider before fecal management system placement. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B698. INCIDENCIA Y CARACTERIZACIN DE LAS COMPLICACIONES RECTALES DE LOS SISTEMAS DE MANEJO FECAL: ANTECEDENTES:Los sistemas de manejo fecal se han vuelto omnipresentes en pacientes hospitalizados con incontinencia fecal o diarrea severa, especialmente en el contexto de heridas perianales. Aunque se ha demostrado que el uso del sistema de tratamiento fecal es seguro y eficaz en la serie inicial, se han notificado casos de ulceración rectal y hemorragia grave, con una relativa escasez de datos de seguridad clínica en la literatura.OBJETIVO:Determinar la tasa de complicaciones rectales atribuibles a los sistemas de manejo fecal. Caracterizar los posibles factores de riesgo y las estrategias de manejo adecuadas para tales complicaciones.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ENTORNO CLINICO:Centro médico académico de mayor volumen.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes médicos y quirúrgicos que se sometieron a la colocación del sistema de manejo fecal desde diciembre de 2014 hasta marzo de 2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Cualquier complicación rectal asociada con el uso del sistema de manejo fecal, definida como cualquier lesión rectal identificada después del uso del sistema de manejo fecal confirmada por endoscopia baja.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron un total de 629 pacientes, con una duración media del uso del sistema de manejo fecal de 4,0 días. En general, 8 (1,3%) pacientes desarrollaron una lesión rectal asociada con el uso del sistema de manejo fecal. Todos los pacientes que mostraron una complicación rectal tenían comorbilidades subyacentes graves, incluidos dos pacientes en diálisis, un paciente con cirrosis y tres pacientes con antecedentes recientes de cirugía cardíaca emergente. En tres pacientes el sangrado se resolvió espontáneamente, mientras que los cinco pacientes restantes requirieron intervención: ligadura de sutura transanal (2), colocación de clip endoscópico (1), taponamiento rectal (1) y proctectomía en un paciente con antecedentes de radioterapia pélvica.LIMITACIONES:Diseño retrospectivo, institución única.CONCLUSIONES:Este es el estudio más grande hasta la fecha que evalúa las complicaciones rectales del uso del sistema de manejo fecal. Si bien las tasas de lesión rectal son bajas, pueden provocar una morbilidad grave. La edad avanzada, las comorbilidades graves, la radioterapia pélvica y el estado de anticoagulación o coagulopatía son factores importantes a considerar antes de la colocación del sistema de manejo fecal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B698.

Preoperative REM sleep is associated with complication development after colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: While total sleep duration and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep duration have been associated with long-term mortality in non-surgical cohorts, the impact of preoperative sleep on postoperative outcomes has not been well studied. METHODS: In this secondary analysis of a prospective observational cohort study, patients who recorded at least 1 sleep episode using a consumer wearable device in the 7 days before elective colorectal surgery were included. 30-day postoperative outcomes among those who did and did not receive at least 6 h of total sleep, as well as those who did and did not receive at least 1 h of rapid eye movement (REM) sleep, were compared. RESULTS: 34 out of 95 (35.8%) patients averaged at least 6 h of sleep per night, while 44 out of 82 (53.7%) averaged 1 h or more of REM sleep. Patients who slept less than 6 h had similar postoperative outcomes compared to those who slept 6 h or more. Patients who averaged less than 1 h of REM sleep, compared to those who achieved 1 h or more of REM sleep, had significantly higher rates of complication development (29.0% vs. 9.1%, P = 0.02), and return to the OR (10.5% vs. 0%, P = 0.04). After adjustment for confounding factors, increased REM sleep duration remained significantly associated with decreased complication development (increase in REM sleep from 50 to 60 min: OR 0.72, P = 0.009; REM sleep ≥ 1 h: OR 0.22, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: In this cohort of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, those who developed a complication within 30 days were less likely to average at least 1 h of REM sleep in the week before surgery than those who did not develop a complication. Preoperative REM sleep duration may represent a risk factor for surgical complications; however additional research is necessary to confirm this relationship.

Wearable technology and the association of perioperative activity level with 30-day readmission among patients undergoing major colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The proliferation of wearable technology presents a novel opportunity for perioperative activity monitoring; however, the association between perioperative activity level and readmission remains underexplored. This study sought to determine whether physical activity data captured by wearable technology before and after colorectal surgery can be used to predict 30-day readmission. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study of adults undergoing elective major colorectal surgery (January 2018 to February 2019) at a single institution, participants wore an activity monitor 30 days before and after surgery. The primary outcome was return to baseline percentage, defined as step count on the day before discharge as a percentage of mean preoperative daily step count, among readmitted and non-readmitted patients. RESULTS: 94 patients had sufficient data available for analysis, of which 16 patients (17.0%) were readmitted within 30 days following discharge. Readmitted patients achieved a lower return to baseline percentage compared to patients who were not readmitted (median 15.1% vs. 31.8%; P = 0.004). On multivariable analysis adjusting for readmission risk and hospital length of stay, an absolute increase of 10% in return to baseline percentage was associated with a 40% decreased risk of 30-day readmission (odds ratio 0.60; P = 0.02). Analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve identified 28.9% as an optimal return to baseline percent threshold for predicting readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving a higher percentage of an individual's preoperative baseline activity level on the day prior to discharge after major colorectal surgery is associated with decreased risk of 30-day hospital readmission.

Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications within a colorectal-enhanced recovery protocol.

BACKGROUND: As the opioid epidemic escalates, preoperative opioid use has become increasingly common. Recent studies associated preoperative opioid use with postoperative morbidity. However, limited study of its impact on patients within enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) exists. We assessed the impact of preoperative opioid use on postoperative complications among colorectal surgery patients within an ERP, hypothesizing that opioid-exposed patients would be at increased risk of complications. METHODS: Elective colorectal cases from August 2013 to June 2017 were reviewed in a retrospective cohort study comparing preoperative opioid-exposed patients to opioid-naïve patients. Postoperative complications were defined as a composite of complications captured by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Logistic regression identified risk factors for postoperative complications. RESULTS: 707 patients were identified, including 232 (32.8%) opioid-exposed patients. Opioid-exposed patients were younger (57.9 vs 61.9 years; p < 0.01) and more likely to smoke (27.6 vs 17.1%; p < 0.01). Laparoscopic procedures were less common among opioid-exposed patients (44.8 vs 58.1%; p < 0.01). Median morphine equivalents received were higher in opioid-exposed patients (65.0 vs 20.1 mg; p < 0.01), but compliance to ERP elements was otherwise equivalent. Postoperative complications were higher among opioid-exposed patients (28.5 vs 15.0%; p < 0.01), as was median length of stay (4.0 vs 3.0 days; p < 0.01). Logistic regression identified multiple patient- and procedure-related factors independently associated with postoperative complications, including preoperative opioid use (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative opioid use is associated with increased risk of postoperative complications in elective colorectal surgery patients within an ERP. These results highlight the negative impact of opioid use, suggesting an opportunity to further reduce the risk of surgical complications through ERP expansion to include preoperative mitigation strategies for opioid-exposed patients.

An Unintended Consequence of a New Opioid Legislation.

BACKGROUND: The Controlled Substance Act was enacted in efforts to reduce the abuse and misuse of opioid pain relievers. However, the effects of this regulation on the prescribing patterns of providers has yet to be realized. OBJECTIVE: We sought to identify the changes in opioid-prescribing patterns of an elective colorectal surgical practice as a result of this legislative change. DESIGN: This is a retrospective study of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Patients were intentionally grouped into group A (January 1, 2012 to October 5, 2014) and group B (October 6, 2014 to December 31, 2016) to capture the period surrounding the new legislation. SETTINGS: We evaluated patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery at a single academic center over a 5-year period. PATIENTS: There were 443 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2012 and 2016. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was total milligram morphine equivalent of pain medication prescribed at discharge. Secondary outcomes included total number of pills prescribed, total milligram morphine equivalent of pain medication at subsequent prescriptions, and numeric postoperative pain scores. RESULTS: Patients in group B were found to have a greater mean total milligram morphine equivalent prescribed at discharge (719 (SD 593) vs 660 (SD 548), p = 0.03), mean total quantity of pills prescribed at discharge (98 (SD 106) vs 87 (SD 63), p = 0.05), and mean total quantity of pills prescribed as subsequent prescriptions (77 (SD 117) vs 68 (SD 83), p = 0.05) compared with group A. On multivariable analysis, group B was a significant predictor of greater total milligram morphine equivalents prescribed at discharge compared with group A (p = 0.01). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by analysis from a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts to minimize opioid prescriptions after surgery through legislation could result in unintended consequences. Recognition of this result is important to effectively reduce opioid prescriptions after surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B96. UNA CONSECUENCIA NO DESEADA DE UNA NUEVA LEGISLACIÓN DE OPIOIDES: La Ley de Sustancias Controladas se promulgó con el fin de reducir el abuso y el uso indebido de analgésicos opioides. Sin embargo, los efectos de esta regulación en los patrones de prescripción de los proveedores aún no se han realizado.Se intento identificar los cambios en los patrones de prescripción de opioides de una práctica quirúrgica colorrectal electiva como resultado de este cambio legislativo.Este es un estudio retrospectivo de pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal electiva. Los pacientes fueron agrupados intencionalmente en el Grupo A (1 de enero de 2012 al 5 de octubre de 2014) y el Grupo B (6 de octubre de 2014 al 31 de diciembre de 2016) para capturar el período que rodea la nueva legislación.Se evaluaron a los pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal electiva en un solo centro académico durante un período de 5 años.Hubo 443 pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía colorrectal electiva entre 2012-2016.La medida de resultado primaria fue el equivalente de miligramos de morfina total de los analgésicos prescritos al momento del alta. Las medidas de resultado secundarias incluyeron el número total de píldoras prescritas, el equivalente total de miligramos de morfina de la medicación para el dolor en las prescripciones posteriores y las puntuaciones numéricas de dolor postoperatorio.Se encontró que los pacientes en el Grupo B tenían un equivalente de miligramos de morfina total total mayor prescrito al alta (719 [DE 593] v. 660 [DE 548], p = 0.03), cantidad total promedio de píldoras prescritas al alta (98 [SD 106] v. 87 [SD 63], p = 0.05), y la cantidad total promedio de píldoras recetadas como recetas posteriores (77 [SD 117] v. 68 [SD 83], p = 0.05) en comparación con el Grupo A. En análisis multivariable, el Grupo B fue un predictor significativo de mayores equivalentes de morfina en miligramos totales prescritos al alta en comparación con el grupo A (p = 0.01).Este estudio está limitado por el análisis de una sola instituciónLos esfuerzos para minimizar las recetas de opioides después de la cirugía a través de la legislación podrían tener consecuencias no deseadas. El reconocimiento de este resultado es importante para reducir eficazmente las recetas de opioides después de la cirugía. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B96.

Wearable Technology in the Perioperative Period: Predicting Risk of Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Elective Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The implementation of protocolized care pathways has resulted in major improvements in surgical outcomes. Additional gains will require focused efforts to alter preexisting risk. Prehabilitation programs provide a promising avenue for risk reduction. OBJECTIVE: This study used wearable technology to monitor activity levels before colorectal surgery to evaluate the impact of preoperative activity on postoperative outcomes. DESIGN: This was a prospective nonrandomized observational study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery from January 2018 to February 1, 2019, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients were trained in the usage of wearable activity-tracking devices and instructed to wear the device for 30 days before surgery. Patients were stratified as active (≥5000 steps per day) and inactive (<5000 steps per day) based on preoperative step counts. Univariate analyses compared postoperative outcomes. Multivariable regression models analyzed the impact of preoperative activity on postoperative complications, adjusting for each patient's baseline risk as calculated using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Surgical Risk Calculator. Models were rerun without the addition of activity and the predictive ability of the models compared. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were included, with 40 (40.4%) classified as active. Active patients experienced fewer overall complications (11/40 (27.5%) vs 33/59 (55.9%); p = 0.005) and serious complications (2/40 (5%) vs 12/59 (20.3%); p = 0.032). Increased preoperative activity was associated with a decreased risk of any postoperative complication (OR = 0.386; p = 0.0440) on multivariable analysis. The predictive ability of the models for complications and serious complications was improved with the addition of physical activity. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its small sample size and single institution. CONCLUSIONS: There is significant room for improvement in baseline preoperative activity levels of patients undergoing colorectal surgery, and poor activity is associated with increased postoperative complications. These data will serve as the basis for an interventional trial investigating whether wearable devices help improve surgical outcomes through a monitored preoperative exercise program. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B145. TECNOLOGÍA PORTÁTIL EN EL PERÍODO PERIOPERATORIO: PREDICCIÓN DEL RIESGO DE COMPLICACIONES POSTOPERATORIAS EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL ELECTIVA: La implementación de vías de atención protocolizadas ha dado lugar a importantes mejoras en los resultados quirúrgicos. Para obtener más beneficios será necesario realizar esfuerzos concentrados para modificar el riesgo preexistente. Los programas de rehabilitación proporcionan una vía prometedora para la reducción del riesgo.Este estudio utilizó tecnología portátil para monitorear los niveles de actividad antes de la cirugía colorrectal para evaluar el impacto de la actividad preoperatoria en los resultados postoperatorios.Estudio observacional prospectivo no aleatorizado.Gran centro médico académico.Pacientes sometidos a cirugía colorrectal electiva desde enero de 2018 hasta el 1 de febrero de 2019.Los pacientes fueron entrenados en el uso de dispositivos portátiles para el seguimiento de la actividad y se les indicó usar el dispositivo durante 30 días antes de la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron estratificados como activos (> 5000 pasos / día) e inactivos (<5000 pasos / día) en base a los recuentos de pasos preoperatorios. Los análisis univariados compararon los resultados postoperatorios. Los modelos de regresión multivariable analizaron el impacto de la actividad preoperatoria en las complicaciones postoperatorias, ajustando el riesgo de referencia de cada paciente según lo calculado utilizando la Calculadora de riesgo quirúrgico del Programa Nacional de Mejora de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Americano de Cirujanos. Los modelos se volvieron a ejecutar sin agregar actividad, y se comparó la capacidad de predicción de los modelos.Noventa y nueve pacientes fueron incluidos con 40 (40.4%) clasificados como activos. Los pacientes activos experimentaron menos complicaciones generales [11/40 (27,5%) frente a 33/59 (55,9%); p = 0,005] y complicaciones graves [2/40 (5%) frente a 12/59 (20,3%); p = 0,032]. El aumento de la actividad preoperatoria se asoció con una disminución del riesgo de cualquier complicación postoperatoria (OR 0.386, p = 0.0440) en el análisis multivariable. La capacidad predictiva de los modelos para complicaciones y complicaciones graves mejoró con la adición de actividad física.Tamaño de muestra pequeño, una sola institución.Existe un margen significativo para mejorar los niveles basales de actividad preoperatoria de los pacientes de cirugía colorrectal, y la escasa actividad se asocia con mayores complicaciones postoperatorias. Estos datos servirán de base para un ensayo intervencionista que investigue si los dispositivos portátiles ayudan a mejorar los resultados quirúrgicos a través de un programa de ejercicio preoperatorio monitoreado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B145.

Diagnosis and Treatment of Rectal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors.

CASE SUMMARY: A 69-year-old man presented with a rectal mass that was noted on physical examination. Flexible sigmoidoscopy confirmed the presence of a well-defined mass 3 cm from the anal verge (). Magnetic resonance imaging of the pelvis identified a 5.8-cm heterogeneous mass with intersphincteric extension. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography revealed no evidence of distant metastatic disease. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine-needle aspiration revealed a noncircumferential submucosal hypoechoic mass () with pathology significant for spindle cells staining positive for CD117, consistent with a GI stromal tumor (GIST). The patient received 5 months of neoadjuvant imatinib with great response () and subsequently underwent transanal endoscopic microsurgical resection. He continues on adjuvant imatinib and is currently without signs of recurrence at 18 months postprocedure; he is undergoing restaging CT chest/abdomen/pelvis and surveillance flexible sigmoidoscopy every 6 months.

Implementation of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol Is Associated With On-Time Initiation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Delayed initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy negatively impacts long-term survival in patients with colorectal cancer. Colorectal enhanced recovery protocols result in decreased complications and length of stay; however, the impact of enhanced recovery on the timing of adjuvant chemotherapy remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify factors associated with on-time delivery of adjuvant chemotherapy after colorectal cancer surgery, hypothesizing that implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol would result in more patients receiving on-time chemotherapy. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery after colorectal cancer resection before and after implementation of an enhanced recovery protocol. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: All of the patients who underwent nonemergent colorectal cancer resections for curative intent from January 2010 to June 2017, excluding patients who had no indication for adjuvant chemotherapy, had received preoperative systemic chemotherapy, or did not have medical oncology records available were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients before and enhanced recovery were compared, with the rate of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy delivery as the primary outcome. Adjuvant chemotherapy delivery was considered on time if initiated ≤8 weeks postoperatively, and treatment was considered delayed or omitted if initiated >8 weeks postoperatively (delayed) or never received (omitted). Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of on-time chemotherapy delivery. RESULTS: A total of 363 patients met inclusion criteria, with 189 patients (52.1%) undergoing surgery after enhanced recovery implementation. Groups differed in laparoscopic approach and median procedure duration, both of which were higher after enhanced recovery. Significantly more patients received on-time chemotherapy after enhanced recovery implementation (p = 0.007). Enhanced recovery was an independent predictor of on-time adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.014). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design. CONCLUSIONS: Enhanced recovery was associated with receiving on-time adjuvant chemotherapy. As prompt initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in colorectal cancer, future investigation of long-term oncologic outcomes is necessary to evaluate the potential impact of enhanced recovery on survival. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21. LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN PROTOCOLO DE RECUPERACIÓN ACELERADA SE ASOCIA CON EL INICIO A TIEMPO DE QUIMIOTERAPIA ADYUVANTE EN CÁNCER COLORRECTAL:: El inicio tardío de la quimioterapia adyuvante afecta negativamente la supervivencia a largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer colorrectal. Los protocolos de recuperación acelerada colorrectales dan lugar a una disminución de las complicaciones y la duración de estancia hospitalaria; sin embargo, el impacto de la recuperación acelerada en el momento de inicio de quimioterapia adyuvante sigue siendo desconocido.Este estudio tuvo como objetivo identificar los factores asociados con la administración a tiempo de la quimioterapia adyuvante después de la cirugía de cáncer colorrectal, con la hipótesis de que la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada daría lugar a que más pacientes reciban quimioterapia a tiempo.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo que compara la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo después de la resección del cáncer colorrectal antes y después de la implementación de un protocolo de recuperación acelerada.Centro médico académico grande.Todos los pacientes que se sometieron a resecciones de cáncer colorrectal no emergentes con intención curativa desde enero de 2010 hasta junio de 2017, excluyendo a los pacientes que no tenían indicación de quimioterapia adyuvante, que recibieron quimioterapia sistémica preoperatoria o no tenían registros médicos de oncología disponibles.Los pacientes se compararon antes y después de la implementación de la recuperación acelerada, con la tasa de administración de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo como el resultado primario. La administración de quimioterapia adyuvante se consideró a tiempo si se inició ≤8 semanas después de la operación, y el tratamiento se consideró retrasado / omitido si se inició> 8 semanas después de la operación (retrasado) o nunca fue recibido (omitido). La regresión logística multivariable identificó predictores de administración de quimioterapia a tiempo.363 pacientes cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión, con 189 (52.1%) pacientes sometidos a cirugía después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada. Los grupos difirieron en el abordaje laparoscópico y la duración media del procedimiento; ambos factores fueron mayores después de la recuperación acelerada. Significativamente más pacientes recibieron quimioterapia a tiempo después de la implementación de recuperación acelerada (p = 0.007). La recuperación acelerada fue un factor predictivo independiente de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo (p = 0.014).Diseño retrospectivo, tipo ¨antes y después¨ no aleatorizado.La recuperación acelerada se asoció con la recepción de quimioterapia adyuvante a tiempo. Debido a que el inicio rápido de la quimioterapia adyuvante mejora la supervivencia en el cáncer colorrectal, en el futuro será necesario investigar los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo para evaluar el impacto potencial de la recuperación acelerada en la supervivencia. Vea el Resumen en Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B21.

Open Surgical Incisions After Colorectal Surgery Improve Quality Metrics, But Do Patients Benefit?

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection is a frequent cause of morbidity after colorectal resection and is a quality measure for hospitals and surgeons. In an effort to reduce the risk of postoperative infections, many wounds are left open at the time of surgery for secondary or delayed primary wound closure. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of delayed wound closure on the rate of surgical infections and resource use. DESIGN: This retrospective propensity-matched study compared colorectal surgery patients with wounds left open with a cohort of patients with primary skin closure. SETTINGS: The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program Participant Use file for 2014 was queried. PATIENTS: A total of 50,212 patients who underwent elective or emergent colectomy, proctectomy, and stoma creation were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rates of postoperative infections and discharge to medical facilities were measured. RESULTS: Surgical wounds were left open in 2.9% of colorectal cases (n = 1466). Patients with skin left open were broadly higher risk, as evidenced by a significantly higher median estimated probability of 30-day mortality (3.40% vs 0.45%; p < 0.0001). After propensity matching (n = 1382 per group), there were no significant differences between baseline characteristics. Within the matched cohort, there were no differences in the rates of 30-day mortality, deep or organ space infection, or sepsis (all p > 0.05). Resource use was higher for patients with incisions left open, including longer length of stay (11 vs 10 d; p = 0.006) and higher rates of discharge to a facility (34% vs 27%; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and a large data set with a bias toward academic institutions. CONCLUSIONS: In a well-matched colorectal cohort, secondary or delayed wound closure eliminates superficial surgical infections, but there was no decrease in deep or organ space infections. In addition, attention should be given to the possibility for increased resource use associated with open surgical incisions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A560.

Acute Kidney Injury in the Age of Enhanced Recovery Protocols.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury is a prevalent complication after abdominal surgery. With increasing adoption of enhanced recovery protocols, concern exists for concomitant increase in acute kidney injury. OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated effects of enhanced recovery on acute kidney injury through identification of risk factors. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing acute kidney injury rates before and after implementation of enhanced recovery protocol. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a large academic medical center. PATIENTS: All of the patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2010 and 2016, excluding patients with stage 5 chronic kidney disease, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients before and after enhanced recovery implementation were compared, with rate of acute kidney injury as the primary outcome. Acute kidney injury was defined as a rise in serum creatinine ≥1.5 times baseline within 30 days of surgery. Multivariable logistic regression identified risk factors for acute kidney injury. RESULTS: A total of 900 cases were identified, including 461 before and 439 after enhanced recovery; 114 cases were complicated by acute kidney injury, including 11.93% of patients before and 13.44% after implementation of enhanced recovery (p = 0.50). Five patients required hemodialysis, with 2 cases after protocol implementation. Multivariable logistic regression identified hypertension, functional status, ureteral stents, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, operative time >200 minutes, and increased intravenous fluid administration on postoperative day 1 as predictors of acute kidney injury. Laparoscopic surgery decreased the risk of acute kidney injury. The enhanced recovery protocol was not independently associated with acute kidney injury. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective and nonrandomized before-and-after design. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in rates of acute kidney injury was detected before and after implementation of a colorectal enhanced recovery protocol. Independent predictors of acute kidney injury were identified and could be used to alter the protocol in high-risk patients. Future study is needed to determine whether protocol modifications will further decrease rates of acute kidney injury in this population. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A568.

Impact of minimally invasive surgery on short-term outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm within the setting of an enhanced recovery program.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for rectal cancer has increased in recent years. Enhanced recovery (ER) protocols are associated with improved outcomes, such as decreased length of stay (LOS). We examined the impact of MIS and ER protocols on outcomes after rectal resection for neoplasm. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed for patients undergoing elective open (OS) or MIS rectal resection for neoplasm from 2010 to 2015 at a single institution. MIS was defined as any laparoscopic or robotic procedure. An ER protocol was implemented in 8/2013. Regression models were used to estimate outcomes including LOS, 30-day morbidity, readmission, and hospital costs. RESULTS: Among 325 patients, 252 (77.5%) underwent OS; 73 (22.5%) underwent MIS rectal resection. Prior to ER implementation, only 6.1% underwent MIS, compared to 23.1 and 54.4% in the 2 years following ER implementation (p < 0.001). Prior to ER implementation, median LOS was 7 days (n = 181) with 23.8% 30-day morbidity. Following ER implementation, median LOS was 4 days (n = 144); patients receiving OS had median LOS of 5.5 days (n = 82) and 30-day morbidity of 19.5%. ER patients receiving MIS had median LOS of 3 days (n = 62) and 30-day morbidity of 14.5%. Univariate regression demonstrated that MIS patients on ER protocol were more likely to have a shortened LOS (< 6 days) compared to OS patients on non-ER protocol (both p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of MIS and ER protocol is significantly associated with reduced LOS for patients undergoing rectal resection for neoplasm. Further research is needed to determine which patients are best suited to MIS from an oncologic standpoint.

Ureteral stents increase risk of postoperative acute kidney injury following colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Ureteral stents are commonly placed before colorectal resection to assist in identification of ureters and prevent injury. Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common cause of morbidity and increased cost following colorectal surgery. Although previously associated with reflex anuria, prophylactic stents have not been found to increase AKI. We sought to determine the impact of ureteral stents on the incidence of AKI following colorectal surgery. METHODS: All patients undergoing colon or rectal resection at a single institution between 2005 and 2015 were reviewed using American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset. AKI was defined as a rise in serum creatinine to ≥ 1.5 times the preoperative value. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of AKI. RESULTS: 2910 patients underwent colorectal resection. Prophylactic ureteral stents were placed in 129 patients (4.6%). Postoperative AKI occurred in 335 (11.5%) patients during their hospitalization. The stent group demonstrated increased AKI incidence (32.6% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.0001) with bilateral having a higher rate than unilateral stents. Hospital costs were higher in the stent group ($23,629 vs. $16,091; p < 0.0001), and patients with bilateral stents had the highest costs. Multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of AKI after colorectal surgery including age, procedure duration, and ureteral stent placement. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic ureteral stents independently increased AKI risk when placed prior to colorectal surgery. These data demonstrate increased morbidity and hospital costs related to usage of stents in colorectal surgery, indicating that placement should be limited to patients with highest potential benefit.

Reducing Readmissions While Shortening Length of Stay: The Positive Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Protocol in Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission rates are an increasingly important quality metric since enactment of the 2012 Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program. The proliferation of enhanced recovery protocols and earlier discharge raises concerns for increased readmission rates. OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the effect of enhanced recovery on readmissions and identified risk factors for readmission. DESIGN: This study involved implementation of a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery protocol. SETTINGS: It was conducted at a large academic medical center PATIENTS:: All patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery between 2011 and 2015 at our center were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: This cohort study compared patients before and after enhanced recovery initiation, looking at 30-day readmission as the primary outcome. A multivariable logistic regression model identified predictors of 30-day readmission. Kaplan-Meier analysis identified differences in time to readmission. RESULTS: A total of 707 patients underwent colorectal procedures between 2011 and 2015, including 383 patients before enhanced recovery protocol was implemented and 324 patients after enhanced protocol was implemented. Length of stay decreased from a median 5 days to a median 4 days before and after enhanced recovery implementation (p < 0.0001). Thirty-day readmission decreased from 19% (72/383) in the pre-enhanced recovery pathway to 12% (38/324) in the enhanced recovery pathway (p = 0.009). Twenty-one percent (21/99) of patients who underwent ileostomy were readmitted before enhanced recovery implementation compared with 19% (18/93) of patients who underwent ileostomy after enhanced recovery implementation (p = 0.16). Multivariable logistic regression identified ileostomy as increasing the risk of readmission (p = 0.04), whereas enhanced recovery protocol decreased the risk of readmission (p = 0.006). LIMITATIONS: The study is limited because it was conducted at a single institution and used a before-and-after study design. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that use of a standardized enhanced recovery protocol significantly reduces length of stay and readmission rates in an elective colorectal surgery population. However, the presence of an ileostomy maintains a high association with readmission, serving as a significant burden to patients and providers alike. Ongoing efforts are needed to further improve the management of patients undergoing ileostomy in the outpatient setting after discharge to prevent readmissions.

Adoption of robotics in a general surgery residency program: at what cost?

BACKGROUND: Robotic technology is increasingly being utilized by general surgeons. However, the impact of introducing robotics to surgical residency has not been examined. This study aims to assess the financial costs and training impact of introducing robotics at an academic general surgery residency program. METHODS: All patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair (VHR), and inguinal hernia repair (IHR) at our institution from 2011-2015 were identified. The effect of robotic surgery on laparoscopic case volume was assessed with linear regression analysis. Resident participation, operative time, hospital costs, and patient charges were also evaluated. RESULTS: We identified 2260 laparoscopic and 139 robotic operations. As the volume of robotic cases increased, the number of laparoscopic cases steadily decreased. Residents participated in all laparoscopic cases and 70% of robotic cases but operated from the robot console in only 21% of cases. Mean operative time was increased for robotic cholecystectomy (+22%), IHR (+55%), and VHR (+61%). Financial analysis revealed higher median hospital costs per case for robotic cholecystectomy (+$411), IHR (+$887), and VHR (+$1124) as well as substantial associated fixed costs. CONCLUSIONS: Introduction of robotic surgery had considerable negative impact on laparoscopic case volume and significantly decreased resident participation. Increased operative time and hospital costs are substantial. An institution must be cognizant of these effects when considering implementing robotics in departments with a general surgery residency program.

A pilot study of patient-centered outcome assessment using PROMIS for patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

PURPOSE: Few studies have assessed patient-reported outcomes following colorectal surgery. The absence of this information makes it difficult to inform patients about the near-term effects of surgery, beyond outcomes assessed by traditional clinical measures. This study was designed to provide information about the effects of colorectal surgery on physical, mental, and social well-being outcomes. METHODS: The NIH Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Assessment Center was used to collect patient responses prior to surgery and at their routine postoperative visit. Four domains were selected based on patient consultation and clinical experience: depression, pain interference, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and interest in sexual activity. Multilevel random coefficient models were used to assess the change in scores during the follow-up period and to assess the statistical significance of differences in trends over time associated with key clinical measures. RESULTS: In total, 142 patients were consented, with 107 patients completing pre- and postoperative assessments (75%). Preoperative assessments were typically completed 1 month prior to surgery (mean 29.5 days before, SD = 19.7) and postoperative assessments 1 month after surgery (mean 30.7 days after, SD = 9.2), with a mean of 60.3 days between assessment dates. Patients demonstrated no statistically significant changes in scores for pain interference (-0.18 points, p = 0.80) or the ability to participate in social roles and activities (0.44 points, p = 0.55), but had significant decreases in depression scores between pre- and postoperative assessments (-1.6 points, p = 0.03) and near significant increases in scores for interest in sex (1.5 points, p = 0.06). Pain interference scores for patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy significantly increased (3.5 points, p = 0.03). Scores for the interest in sex domain decreased (worsened) for patients with oncologic etiology (-3.7 points, p = 0.03). No other differences in score trends by patient characteristics were large enough to be statistically significant at the p < 0.05 threshold. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that the majority of patients quickly return to baseline physical, mental, and social function following colorectal surgery. This information can be used preoperatively to counsel patients about the typical impact of colorectal surgery on quality of life.