Impact of telehealth postoperative care on early outcomes following esophagectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To address the short-term clinical outcomes of patients postesophagectomy who underwent telehealth care following surgery. The primary objective was to compare the frequency of emergency department admission between telehealth and in-person cohorts. Secondary objectives included comparing the frequency of endoscopies and clinic visits, as well as reasons for emergency department admission. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to assess the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent esophagectomy between March 2018 and May 2022. Patients attending telehealth (phone or video call) surgical follow-up visits, largely due to the COVID-19 pandemic, were compared with a pre-COVID cohort of patients attending standard in-person care. Demographic data, clinical and disease characteristics, and hospital visit data within 6 months of operation were collected. This included surgical clinic visits, endoscopies, and emergency department admissions. RESULTS: There were 168 patients who underwent esophagectomy and had follow-up care between March 2018 and May 2022; 76 telehealth and 92 in-person. Patients attending telehealth appointments had significantly fewer emergency department admissions (0.45 vs 0.79, P = .037) and more endoscopy visits (1.37 vs 0.91, P = .020) compared with patients attending in-person visits. The number of follow-up surgical clinic visits did not differ between the groups. The most frequent reasons for emergency visits for the telehealth cohort included dysphagia, feeding-tube problems, and failure to thrive. For the in-person cohort, feeding-tube complications, inflammation/infection, and failure to thrive were the most common reasons. CONCLUSIONS: A program of virtual follow-up, with integrated in person visits and endoscopy as required, is feasible and safe for following patients postesophagectomy.

Global Incidence and Risk Factors Associated With Postoperative Urinary Retention Following Elective Inguinal Hernia Repair: The Retention of Urine After Inguinal Hernia Elective Repair (RETAINER I) Study.

Importance: Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a well-recognized complication of inguinal hernia repair (IHR). A variable incidence of POUR has previously been reported in this context, and contradictory evidence surrounds potential risk factors. Objective: To ascertain the incidence of, explore risk factors for, and determine the health service outcomes of POUR following elective IHR. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Retention of Urine After Inguinal Hernia Elective Repair (RETAINER I) study, an international, prospective cohort study, recruited participants between March 1 and October 31, 2021. This study was conducted across 209 centers in 32 countries in a consecutive sample of adult patients undergoing elective IHR. Exposure: Open or minimally invasive IHR by any surgical technique, under local, neuraxial regional, or general anesthesia. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of POUR following elective IHR. Secondary outcomes were perioperative risk factors, management, clinical consequences, and health service outcomes of POUR. A preoperative International Prostate Symptom Score was measured in male patients. Results: In total, 4151 patients (3882 male and 269 female; median [IQR] age, 56 [43-68] years) were studied. Inguinal hernia repair was commenced via an open surgical approach in 82.2% of patients (n = 3414) and minimally invasive surgery in 17.8% (n = 737). The primary form of anesthesia was general in 40.9% of patients (n = 1696), neuraxial regional in 45.8% (n = 1902), and local in 10.7% (n = 446). Postoperative urinary retention occurred in 5.8% of male patients (n = 224), 2.97% of female patients (n = 8), and 9.5% (119 of 1252) of male patients aged 65 years or older. Risk factors for POUR after adjusted analyses included increasing age, anticholinergic medication, history of urinary retention, constipation, out-of-hours surgery, involvement of urinary bladder within the hernia, temporary intraoperative urethral catheterization, and increasing operative duration. Postoperative urinary retention was the primary reason for 27.8% of unplanned day-case surgery admissions (n = 74) and 51.8% of 30-day readmissions (n = 72). Conclusions: The findings of this cohort study suggest that 1 in 17 male patients, 1 in 11 male patients aged 65 years or older, and 1 in 34 female patients may develop POUR following IHR. These findings could inform preoperative patient counseling. In addition, awareness of modifiable risk factors may help to identify patients at increased risk of POUR who may benefit from perioperative risk mitigation strategies.

Nodal Yield <15 Is Associated With Reduced Survival in Esophagectomy and Is a Quality Metric.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy remains the cornerstone of curative management of esophageal adenocarcinoma and is frequently used for squamous cell carcinoma. The optimal extent of lymphadenectomy and whether increasing lymph node yields confer a survival benefit remains unclear. Guidelines suggest resecting and examining a minimum of 15 lymph nodes at esophagectomy. This study assessed the impact of lymph node yield and lymph node ratio (LNR) on survival, identifying factors influencing nodal yield and radicality of resection. METHODS: All patients undergoing esophagectomy with curative intent at a single institution (stage 1-4 inclusive) from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2020, were reviewed. Clinical and pathologic variables were interrogated. LNR was calculated by dividing positive lymph nodes by the total nodes resected. RESULTS: Esophagectomy was performed in 397 patients, with 288 undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE). Margin status (hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.15-2.83; P < .01), nodal yield <15 (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.29-3.04; P = .002), and elevated LNR (HR, 8.16; 95% CI, 2.89-23.06; P < .001) predicted survival. MIE had higher nodal yields compared with open procedures (30.7 vs 25.3, P < .001). Patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy had lower nodal yields compared with those with no neoadjuvant therapy and those with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (26.4 vs 30.6 vs 36.8, respectively; P < .001). Regression analysis determined a LNR of <0.05 was associated with a survival benefit. CONCLUSIONS: Textbook lymphadenectomy is associated with improved survival. Low lymph node yield and a high LNR are associated with reduced overall survival. A LNR of <0.05 is associated with significant survival benefit. A minimum nodal yield of 15 should remain the standard of care.

Is the use of a routine intraoperative cholangiogram necessary in laparoscopic cholecystectomy?

INTRODUCTION: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) has been standard of care for symptomatic gallstone disease for almost 30 years, the use of routine intraoperative cholangiogram (IOC) remains controversial. There are marked variations in the use IOC during LC internationally. Debate has continued about its benefit, in part because of inconsistent benefit, time, and resources required to complete IOC. This literature review is presented as a debate to outline the arguments in favour of and against routine IOC in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: A standard literature review of PubMed, Medline, OVID, EMBASE, CINHIL and Web of Science was performed, specifically for literature pertaining to the use of IOC or alternative intra-operative methods for imaging the biliary tree in LC. Two authors assembled the evidence in favour, and two authors assembled the evidence against. RESULTS: From this controversies piece we found that there is little discernible change in the number of BDIs requiring repair procedures. Although IOC is associated with a small absolute reduction in bile duct injury, there are other confounding factors, including a change in laparoscopic learning curves. Alternative technologies such as intra-operative ultrasound, indocyanine green imaging, and increased access to ERCP may contribute to a reduction in the need for routine IOC. CONCLUSIONS: In spite of 30 years of accumulating evidence, routine IOC remains controversial. As technology advances, it is likely that alternative methods of imaging and accessing the bile duct will supplant routine IOC.

The safety and acceptability of using telehealth for follow-up of patients following cancer surgery: A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Although virtual consultations have played an increasing role in delivery of healthcare, the COVID-19 pandemic has hastened their adoption. Furthermore, virtual consultations are now being adopted in areas that were previously considered unsuitable, including post-operative visits for patients undergoing major surgical procedures, and surveillance following cancer operations. This review aims to examine the feasibility, safety, and patient satisfaction with virtual follow-up appointments after cancer operations. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted along PRISMA guidelines. Studies where patients underwent surgical resection of a malignancy with at least one study arm describing virtual follow-ups were included. Studies were assessed for quality. Outcomes including adverse events, detection of recurrence and patient and provider satisfaction were assessed and compared for those undergoing virtual or in-person post-operative visits. RESULTS: Eleven studies, with 3369 patients were included. Cancer types included were gynecological, colorectal, esophageal, lung, thyroid, breast, prostate and major HPB resections. Detection of recurrence and readmission rates were similar when comparing virtual consultations with in-person visits. Most studies showed high patient and healthcare provider satisfaction with virtual consultations following cancer resection. Concerns were raised about the integration of virtual consultations into workflows in fee-for-service settings, where reimbursement for virtual care may be an issue. CONCLUSION: Virtual follow-up care can provide timely and safe consultations in surgical oncology. Virtual consultations are as safe as in-person visits for assessing complications and recurrence. Where appropriate, virtual consultations can safely be integrated into the post-operative care pathway for those undergoing resection of malignancy.

Omission of intraoperative pyloric procedures in minimally invasive esophagectomy: assessing the impact on patients.

Pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy is often undertaken during esophagectomy to aid gastric emptying postoperatively. Minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) frequently omits a pyloric procedure. The impact on perioperative outcomes and the need for subsequent interventions is unclear. This study assesses the requirements for endoscopic balloon dilation of the pylorus (EPD) following MIE. Patients undergoing MIE from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed. Patients undergoing open resection, or an intraoperative pyloric procedure were excluded. Demographic, clinical and pathological data were reviewed. Univariable and multivariable analysis were performed as appropriate. In total, 171 patients underwent MIE. There were no differences in age (median 65 vs. 65 years, P = 0.6), pathological stage (P = 0.10) or ASA status (P = 0.52) between those requiring and not requiring endoscopic pyloric dilation (EPD). Forty-three patients (25%) required EPD, with a total of 71 procedures. Twenty-seven patients (16%) had EPD on their index admission. Seventy-five patients (43%) had a postoperative complication. Higher ASA status was associated with increased requirement for EPD (odds ratio 10.8, P = 0.03). On multivariable analysis, there was no association between the need for a pyloric procedure and overall survival (P = 0.14). Eight patients (5%) required insertion of a feeding jejunostomy in the postoperative period, with no difference between those with or without EPD (P = 0.11). Two patients required subsequent surgical pyloromyotomy for delayed gastric emptying. Although pyloroplasty or pyloromyotomy can safely be excluded during MIE, a quarter of patients will require postoperative EPD procedures. The impact of excluding pyloric procedures on gastric emptying requires further study.

Age alone is not a barrier to efficacy of cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy for colorectal peritoneal metastases: analysis of 1138 patients from the UK and Ireland Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Registry.

BACKGROUND: The management of colorectal peritoneal metastases continues to be a challenge but recent evidence suggests cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) can improve survival. Uncertainty about the relationship between age and tumour biology makes patient selection challenging particularly when reported procedure related morbidity is high and impact on survival outcomes unknown. The UK and Ireland Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Registry was reviewed to assess the influence of age on efficacy of CRS and HIPEC. METHODS: A review of outcomes from the UK and Ireland Colorectal Peritoneal Metastases Registry was performed. Data from 2000 to 2021 were included from five centres in the UK and Ireland, and the cohort were sub-divided into three age groups; <45 years, 45-65 years and >65 years old. Primarily, we examined post-operative morbidity and survival outcomes across the three age groups. In addition, we examined the impact that the completeness of cytoreduction, nodal status, or adverse pathological features had on long-term survival. RESULTS: During the study period, 1138 CPM patients underwent CRS HIPEC. 202 patients(17.8%) were <45 years, 549 patients(48.2%) aged 45-65 years and 387 patients(34%) >65 years. Overall, median length of surgery (CRS and HIPEC), median PCI score and rate of HIPEC administration was similar in all three groups, as was overall rates of major morbidity and/or mortality. Complete cytoreduction rates (CC0) were similar across the three cohorts; 77%, 80.6% and 81%, respectively. Median overall survival for all patients was 38 months following complete cytoreduction. CONCLUSION: Age did not appear to influence morbidity or long-term survival following CRS and HIPEC. When complete cytoreduction is achieved survival outcomes are good. The addition of HIPEC can be performed safely and may reduce local recurrence within the peritoneum.

Vitamin B12 supplementation post-gastrectomy: a service closed-loop audit at St. James's Hospital, Dublin.

BACKGROUND: Vitamin B12 (VB12) deficiency is a well-described complication post-gastrectomy. It is caused by the loss of parietal cell mass leading to megaloblastic anaemia. This closed-loop audit assesses patient understanding of and adherence with VB12 supplementation guidelines post-gastrectomy. METHODS: A closed-loop audit cycle was performed. After the first cycle, an educational intervention was actioned prior to re-audit. One hundred twenty-five patients who underwent gastrectomy between 2010 and 2020 were available for study (86 total gastrectomies (TG), 39 subtotal gastrectomies (STG)). Twenty-nine patients who had not been adherent with VB12 supplementation/surveillance were eligible for re-audit. RESULTS: 91.9% (79/86) of TG patients reported adherence in regular parenteral VB12 supplementation. Adherence was significantly lower for STG for checking (and/or replacing) their VB12, with only 53.8% (21/39) checking their VB12 levels. 67/125 (53.6%) of the patients stated that they knew it was important to supplement B12 post-gastrectomy. 37.8% (43/113) of participants could explain why this was important, and 14.4% (18/125) had any knowledge of the complications of VB12 deficiency. Following re-audit, 5/8 (57.5%) of TG patients who had not been adherent with VB12 supplementation in the first cycle were now adherent with VB12 supplementation following our educational intervention. 7/17 (41.2%) of the STG group had received VB12 or made arrangements to receive supplemental VB12 if it was indicated. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates good adherence in those undergoing TG. Patient understanding correlates with adherence, suggesting that patient education and knowledge reinforcement may be key to adherence with VB12 supplementation. A simple educational intervention can improve adherence with VB12 supplementation in patients undergoing gastrectomy.

Radical Resection in an Era of Immune Therapy for Primary Esophageal Melanoma.

Primary malignant melanoma of the esophagus (PMME) is a rare and aggressive esophageal malignant neoplasm demonstrating poor overall survival. Immunotherapy (IO) is now established as a therapy for aggressive or metastatic cutaneous malignant melanoma. This case series discusses IO for PMME in both the perioperative and salvage setting for curative intent. IO is changing the treatment approaches for PMME and may lead to long-term salvage and survival.

Open versus laparoscopic liver resection of colorectal metastases: a meta-analysis of matched patient populations.

In recent years, the management of colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) has evolved significantly. Laparoscopic liver resection is increasingly being performed, despite a lack of major randomized controlled trial evidence or widespread international consensus. The objective of this review was to compare the short- and long-term outcomes following open and laparoscopic CRLM resection. A systematic review of comparative matched population studies was performed. Evaluated endpoints included surgical outcomes and survival outcomes. Twelve studies were included in this review, reporting on 3095 patients. R0 (negative margins) rates were higher in the laparoscopic CRLM group (89.3% versus 86.9%). In addition, laparoscopic resection was associated with less blood loss (486 mls versus 648 mls, p ≤ 0.0001*) and reduced blood transfusion rates (6.7% vs. 12.2%, OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.08-4.19, p = 0.03*). Major complication rates were higher in the open CRLM group (12.5% vs. 8.1%, OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.30-2.33, p = 0.03*), as was overall hospital length of stay (median 7 versus 5.5 days, p = 0.001*). Perioperative mortality was similar between both groups, and there was no significance in 5-year overall survival for open or laparoscopic CRLM resection groups (58% and 61% respectively). Laparoscopic CRLM resection is associated with less blood loss, lower transfusion rates, major complications, and overall hospital length of stay with comparable oncological outcome.

Successful maintenance of process and outcomes for oesophageal cancer surgery in Ireland during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of the novel coronavirus Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and the coronavirus disease COVID-19 has impacted enormously on non-COVID-19-related hospital care. Curtailment of intensive care unit (ICU) access threatens complex surgery, particularly impacting on outcomes for time-sensitive cancer surgery. Oesophageal cancer surgery is a good example. This study explored the impact of the pandemic on process and short-term surgical outcomes, comparing the first wave of the pandemic from April to June in 2020 with the same period in 2019. METHODS: Data from all four Irish oesophageal cancer centres were reviewed. All patients undergoing resection for oesophageal malignancy from 1 April to 30 June inclusive in 2020 and 2019 were included. Patient, disease, and peri-operative outcomes (including COVID-19 infection) were compared. RESULTS: In 2020, 45 patients underwent oesophagectomy, and 53 in the equivalent period in 2019. There were no differences in patient demographics, co-morbidities, or use of neoadjuvant therapy. The median time to surgery from neoadjuvant therapy was 8 weeks in both 2020 and 2019. There were no significant differences in operative interventions between the two time periods. There was no difference in operative morbidity in 2020 and 2019 (28% vs 40%, p = 0.28). There was no in-hospital mortality in either period. No patient contracted COVID-19 in the perioperative period. CONCLUSIONS: Continuing surgical resection for oesophageal cancer was feasible and safe during the COVID-19 pandemic in Ireland. The national response to this threat was therefore successful by these criteria in the curative management of oesophageal cancer.

Advances in the curative management of oesophageal cancer.

The incidence of oesophageal cancer, in particular adenocarcinoma, has markedly increased over the last four decades with adenocarcinoma becoming the dominant subtype in the West, and mortality rates are high. Nevertheless, overall survival of patients with oesophageal cancer has doubled in the past 20 years, with earlier diagnosis and improved treatments benefiting those patients who can be treated with curative intent. Advances in endotherapy, surgical approaches, and multimodal and other combination therapies have been reported. New vistas have emerged in targeted therapies and immunotherapy, informed by new knowledge in genomics and molecular biology, which present opportunities for personalised cancer therapy and novel clinical trials. This review focuses exclusively on the curative intent treatment pathway, and highlights emerging advances.

Esophagectomy in the Setting of Left-Sided Portal Hypertension.

Left-sided portal hypertension is a rare entity with considerable splenogastric collateralization. We report a case of esophagectomy in the setting of left-sided portal hypertension with resulting treatment of both the esophageal cancer and the portal hypertension.

RETention of urine After INguinal hernia Elective Repair (RETAINER study I and II).

PURPOSE: Post-operative urinary retention (POUR) is a well-recognised complication of inguinal hernia repair (IHR). The magnitude of the problem is unclear, and contradictory evidence surrounds postulated risk factors. POUR risks patient distress, catheter-complications and a financial and logistical burden to services. Separately, in the field of IHR, there has been a lack of research into patients' perceptions of surgical 'success'. Our aim is to perform a two-phase, multi-centre prospective study to:Assess the rate, risk factors and impact related to POUR post IH repair.Develop and validate a patient reported outcome measure (PROM) for inguinal hernia repair. METHODS: RETAINER I: We propose a 24-week prospective study with voluntary international participation in 4 week blocks. All patients undergoing elective IH repair (minimally-invasive/open) will be eligible. Standardised data collection will include patient and perioperative factors. Primary outcome will be development of POUR, defined as the need for insertion of a urinary catheter as determined by the treating clinician. Secondary outcomes will be identification of factors predisposing to POUR and the impact of POUR.RETAINER II: A patient reported outcome measure will be developed using representative patient focus groups for item generation, from which an initial questionnaire will be developed and piloted. Validity, reliability, sensitivity and reproducibility will be assessed using the QQ-10 and standard psychometric methodology. CONCLUSIONS: Using an international multicentre collaborative approach will produce the necessary volume of patients, whilst capturing inter-centre variability, to accurately reflect POUR rates and allow analysis of risk factors. This patient pool will provide an excellent opportunity to develop a PROM using appropriate qualitative methodology. HIGHLIGHTS RETAINER I & II PROTOCOLS: RETAINER (RETention of urine After INguinal hernia Elective Repair) I is a prospective, multicentre, international observational study.RETAINER I aims to explore the incidence of and risk factors for urinary retention following elective inguinal hernia repair.Urinary retention following inguinal hernia repair has a marked impact on patients and creates a significant financial and logistical burden for hospital services.RETAINER II is a prospective, qualitative study, recruiting patients to guide the creation of a patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) for elective inguinal hernia repair.