Is extended venous thromboprophylaxis required in patients undergoing ileal pouch procedure for ulcerative colitis?

AIM: Venous thromboembolic events (VTEs) are relatively common adverse surgical complications. Extended VTE prophylaxis for 4 weeks is recommended after colorectal cancer surgery, but its use in inflammatory bowel disease surgery lacks high-quality evidence. This retrospective study aimed to assess and characterize VTEs within the first 30 days after ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) procedures and subtotal colectomies (STCs) for ulcerative colitis (UC). METHODS: All patients who underwent IPAA for UC between 1 January 2017 and 31 December 2021 were included. VTE rates after IPAA, in-hospital or at-home occurrences, utilization of in-hospital thromboprophylaxis, and prescribed anticoagulant treatment were evaluated. Retrospectively, the same variables were analysed if patients of the cohort underwent STC before the IPAA construction. RESULTS: In all, 204 patients underwent IPAA (61.8% men, 73% laparoscopic), with an average hospital stay of 6.8 days. Among them, 116 patients underwent STC prior to IPAA. Thirteen patients (6.3%) experienced VTEs after IPAA, with 76.9% (10/13) of cases occurring during hospitalization and under adequate thromboprophylaxis. The VTE rate after STC was 10.3% (12/116), with 58.2% (7/12) occurring in hospital and under appropriate thromboprophylaxis. No reoperations or mortality were attributed to thrombotic events. The type and duration of anticoagulant treatment varied considerably. CONCLUSION: The VTE rate after IPAA for UC was 6.3%, with the majority of events occurring in hospital and under adequate thromboprophylaxis. These findings suggest that routine use of extended VTE prophylaxis in our cohort may not be supported. Further research is needed to clarify the optimal VTE prophylaxis strategy for inflammatory bowel disease surgery.

Prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatectomy: results of a Canadian RAND/UCLA appropriateness expert panel.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to define the appropriateness of interventions for the prevention of postoperative pancreatic fistulas (POPF) after pancreatectomy, given the lack of consistent data on this topic. METHODS: Using the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method, we assembled an expert panel to rate clinical scenarios for interventions to prevent POPF after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP). RESULTS: The following interventions were rated appropriate: individualized risk prediction for all patients; perioperative pasireotide administration for patients undergoing PD who have a soft pancreatic gland and a pancreatic duct size of less 3 mm and for patients undergoing DP; pancreaticogastrostomy for patients undergoing PD who have a soft pancreatic gland and pancreaticojejunostomy for PD for patients with a pancreatic duct size of 6 mm or greater regardless of pancreatic gland texture; duct-to-mucosa anastomosis for all patients undergoing PD and dunking anastomosis for patients undergoing PD who have a pancreatic duct size of less than 3 mm with a firm pancreatic gland; simple stapled and reinforced stapled transection for all DP; surgical drains for PD and DP in patients with a soft pancreatic gland; and open and minimally invasive surgery for DP and open surgery for PD. The following were rated inappropriate: gastrointestinal anastomosis for stump closure in all DP and omission of surgical drain in PD for patients with a pancreatic duct diameter less than 3 mm and a soft pancreatic gland. CONCLUSION: The expert panel identified appropriate and inappropriate scenarios for POPF prevention following pancreatectomy, to provide guidance to clinicians. However, the appropriateness of the interventions in the majority of the clinical scenarios was rated as uncertain, demonstrating equipoise.

Selective strategy for intensive monitoring after pheochromocytoma resection.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend 24-48 hours of intensive monitoring after resection of pheochromocytoma. However, many patients do not require it. The objective of this study is to identify preoperative risk factors associated with postoperative hemodynamic instability (HDI) so as to select patients who may not require intensive postoperative monitoring. METHODS: Medical records of patients undergoing pheochromocytoma resection over a 12-year period were reviewed. Postoperative HDI was defined as systolic blood pressure of >200 or <90, heart rate >110 or <50 or needing active resuscitation. RESULTS: We included 41 patients; 49% had postoperative HDI but only 34% had HDI > 6 hours. Risk factors for HDI were preoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) > 100 mm Hg (14% vs 45%), norepinephrine/normetanephrine levels >3x normal (44 vs 82%), and resection of another solid organ (0 vs 20%). Avoidance of planned postoperative monitoring for low-risk patients would have reduced estimated costs by 34%. CONCLUSION: Fewer than one-half of patients undergoing resection for pheochromocytoma benefit from intensive monitoring. High preoperative MAP, high norepinephrine/normetanephrine levels, and concomitant resection of another organ are risk factors for postoperative HDI. After a 6-hour interval of postoperative stability, selective rather than routine use of intensive monitoring may be an efficient strategy for monitoring lower risk patients.