Development of a formative feedback tool for transanal total mesorectal excision.

INTRODUCTION: Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) is a novel procedure in the treatment of rectal cancer. Current training models for TaTME suggest a period of proctored cases, but no structured feedback tool exists to guide operators during the learning phase. The objective of this study therefore was to develop a formative feedback tool for the critical steps of the transanal portion of TaTME. METHODS: A two-round Delphi study by TaTME experts was conducted to determine the items to be included in the formative feedback tool. Participants rated each step from a prepared list using a Likert scale from 1 (Not relevant) to 5 (Very relevant) with the option to suggest additional steps. Responses to the first round were presented in the second round, where participants rated the revised list of steps. Consensus was defined as > 80% of participants rating the step as 4 or 5 (out of 5). Items were combined when appropriate to avoid redundancy. Rating anchors describing performance (on a 5-point scale) were then developed for each step. The final tool was recirculated and participants rated the finished product on its feasibility and usefulness. RESULTS: Twenty-six TaTME experts were contacted for participation. Fifteen experts (58%) participated in the first round of the study, and eleven (42%) participated in the second round. The majority (14, 93%) had completed fellowship training in colorectal surgery. The first round of the Delphi study contained 34 items, and 32 items met inclusion criteria after the second round. Redundant items were combined into 15 items that comprised the final tool. Out of eight respondents to the feasibility survey, all believed the feedback tool enhances the feedback of learners and would use it for training purposes if available. CONCLUSION: This work describes the development of a novel consensus-based formative feedback tool specific to TaTME.

Readmission for Treatment Failure After Nonoperative Management of Acute Diverticulitis: A Nationwide Readmissions Database Analysis.

BACKGROUND: The true incidence of, and risk factors for, readmission for treatment failure after nonoperative management of acute diverticulitis remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and risk factors for readmission for treatment failure after nonoperative management of acute diverticulitis using a large national database. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: A representative sample of admissions and discharges from hospitals in the United States captured in the National Readmissions Database were included. PATIENTS: Adult patients (age ≥18 y) admitted with a primary diagnostic of colonic diverticulitis between 2010 and 2015 and who were managed nonoperatively and discharged from hospital alive were included. INTERVENTIONS: Study intervention included nonoperative management, consisting of medical therapy with or without percutaneous drainage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmission for treatment failure (defined as a nonelective readmission for diverticulitis within 90 d of discharge), complicated treatment failure (defined as a treatment failure with complicated diverticulitis), and time-to-treatment failure were measured. RESULTS: In total, 201,384 patients were included. The overall incidence of readmission for treatment failure was 6.6%. Treatment failure was significantly higher among patients with an index episode of acute complicated diverticulitis compared with acute uncomplicated diverticulitis (12.5% vs 5.7%; p < 0.001). The median time-to-readmission for treatment failure was 21.0 days (range, 20.4-21.6 d), and 85% of all readmissions occurred within 60 days of discharge. On multiple logistic regression, factors independently associated with readmission for treatment failure were an index admission of complicated diverticulitis (OR = 2.06 (95% CI, 1.97-2.16)), disposition on discharge (against medical advice: OR = 1.92 (95% CI, 1.66-2.20); home health care arrangements: OR = 1.24 (95% CI, 1.16-1.33)), and immunosuppression (OR = 1.42 (95% CI, 1.28-1.57)), among others. Risk factors for a complicated treatment failure were also described, after an index episode of complicated and uncomplicated diverticulitis. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by residual confounding from missing covariates and its observational study design. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of readmission for treatment failure after an episode of diverticulitis managed nonoperatively is 6.6%, and an index episode of complicated diverticulitis is the strongest risk factor for treatment failure. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B92. REINGRESO POR FRACASO DEL TRATAMIENTO DESPUÉS DEL TRATAMIENTO NO QUIRÚRGICO DE LA DIVERTICULITIS AGUDA: UN ANÁLISIS DE LA BASE DE DATOS DE REINGRESOS A NIVEL NACIONAL: La verdadera incidencia y los factores de riesgo para el reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento después de manejo no quirúrgico de la diverticulitis aguda siguen siendo mal definidos.Definir la incidencia y los factores de riesgo de reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento no quirúrgico de la diverticulitis aguda utilizando una base de datos nacional.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.Una muestra representativa de ingresos y egresos de hospitales en los Estados Unidos capturados en la base de datos nacional de reingresos hospitalarios.Pacientes adultos (≥18 años) ingresados con un diagnóstico primario de diverticulitis colónica entre 2010-2015, y que fueron tratados de forma no operativa y dados de alta del hospital vivos.Manejo no quirúrgico, que consiste en terapia médica con o sin drenaje percutáneo.Reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento (definido como un reingreso no electivo por diverticulitis dentro de los 90 días despues de ser dados de alta), fracaso del tratamiento complicado (definido como un fracaso del tratamiento con diverticulitis complicada) y el tiempo hasta el tratamiento en casos fracasaados.201.384 pacientes incluidos en total. La incidencia global de reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento fue del 6,6%. El fracaso del tratamiento fue significativamente mayor entre los pacientes con un episodio índice de diverticulitis aguda complicada en comparación con la diverticulitis aguda no complicada (12.5% vs. 5.7%, p <0.001). La mediana del tiempo hasta el reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento fue de 21.0 (20.4 - 21.6) días, y el 85% de todos los reingresos ocurrieron dentro de los 60 días posteriores a ser dados de alta. En la regresión logística múltiple, los factores asociados independientemente con el reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento fueron un índice de admisión de diverticulitis complicada (OR 2.06, IC 95% 1.97-2.16), disposición (de alta en contra del consejo médico: OR 1.92, IC 95% 1.66-2.2; atención médica domiciliaria: OR 1.24, IC 95% 1.16-1.33) e inmunosupresión (OR 1.42, IC 95% 1.28-1.57), entre otros. Los factores de riesgo para un fracaso del tratamiento complicado también se describieron, respectivamente, después de un episodio índice de diverticulitis complicada y no complicada.Covariables faltantes y diseño de estudio observacional.La incidencia de reingreso por fracaso del tratamiento después de un episodio de diverticulitis manejado de forma no operativa es del 6,6%, y un episodio índice de diverticulitis complicada es el factor de riesgo más fuerte para el fracaso del tratamiento. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B92. (Traducción-Dr. Adrian E. Ortega).

Are right-sided colectomies for neoplastic disease at increased risk of primary postoperative ileus compared to left-sided colectomies? A coarsened exact matched analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to determine whether right-sided colectomies (RC) were associated with a higher incidence of primary postoperative ileus (pPOI) compared to left-sided colectomies (LC). METHODS: Patients who underwent elective colectomy for neoplastic disease between 2012 and 2016 were identified using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. RC and LC were defined as having an ileocolic or colocolic/colorectal anastomosis, respectively. Coarsened Exact Matching (CEM) was used to balance the two groups (1:1) on important confounders. The association between type of colectomy and pPOI, defined as POI in the absence of intra-abdominal sepsis, was then assessed in a multiple logistic regression analysis of the matched data. RESULTS: Of 40,636 patients who underwent a colectomy for neoplastic disease, 15,231 underwent a RC and 25,405 a LC. After CEM, 12,949 matched patients remained in each group, and all important confounders were well balanced. The incidence of pPOI was higher in the RC group (11.5% vs. 8.8%, p < 0.001). On multiple logistic regression, RC was associated with a 35% higher odds of developing pPOI compared to LC (OR 1.35, 95% CI 1.25-1.47). RC was also associated with increased risk for NSQIP-defined major morbidity (OR 1.10, 95% CI 1.01-1.20), 30-day readmission (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06-1.27), and increased length of stay (ß = 0.16 days, 95% CI 0.11-0.22). CONCLUSION: pPOI is more common after RC than LC. Future research should aim at better understanding the pathophysiology behind this increased risk and identifying interventions to mitigate pPOI in this population.

Oral Antibiotic Bowel Preparation Prior to Urgent Colectomy Reduces Odds of Organ Space Surgical Site Infections: a NSQIP Propensity-Score Matched Study.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative administration of oral antibiotic bowel preparation (OABP) alone has been shown to reduce infectious outcomes in patients undergoing elective colectomy. However, it remains unclear if these benefits extend to the emergency setting. This is a retrospective, propensity-score matched study comparing 30-day perioperative morbidity between those who received OABP alone versus no preparation prior to urgent colectomy. METHODS: Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database, adults undergoing urgent colectomy from 2012 to 2019 were included. Those who were clinically obstructed or who received mechanical bowel preparation were excluded. Outcomes of interest included: surgical site infection (SSI), leak, ileus, and major morbidity. RESULTS: Of 24,559 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 878 (3.6%) received OABP prior to urgent colectomy. Prior to matching, those receiving no preparation were more likely to have higher ASA class, diabetes, hypertension, preoperative sepsis, open procedures, and a dirty wound classification. After matching, 1756 patients, remained with 878 in each arm. Preoperative characteristics were balanced on univariate analysis. Postoperatively, patients receiving OABP experienced decreased organ space SSI (11.2% vs. 15.5%, p = 0.009) and ileus (30.3% vs. 35.3%, p = 0.029), with no difference in leak rates (3.3% vs 3.3%, p = 1.000) or NSQIP major morbidity (47.4% vs. 49.9%, p = 0.316). On multivariate logistic regression, including propensity score, the reduction in organ space SSI associated with OABP persisted (OR 0.684, 95% CI 0.516-0.903). CONCLUSION: OABP prior to select urgent colectomies was associated with fewer organ space SSIs and may be considered when feasible.