Prevalence of cannabis use disorder and perioperative outcomes in adult colectomy patients: A propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The decriminalization of cannabis across the United States has led to an increased number of patients reporting cannabis use prior to surgery. However, it is unknown whether preoperative cannabis use disorder (CUD) increases the risk of postoperative complications among adult colectomy patients. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing an elective colectomy were retrospectively analyzed from the National Inpatient Sample database (2004-2018). To control for potential confounders, patients with CUD, defined using ICD-9/10 codes, were propensity score matched to patients without CUD in a 1:1 ratio. The association between preoperative CUD and composite morbidity, the primary outcome of interest, was assessed. Subgroup analyses were performed after stratification by age (≥50 years). RESULTS: Among 432,018 adult colectomy patients, 816 (0.19%) reported preoperative CUD. The prevalence of CUD increased nearly three-fold during the study period from 0.8/1000 patients in 2004 to 2.0/1000 patients in 2018 (P-trend<0.001). After propensity score matching, patients with CUD exhibited similar rates of composite morbidity (140 of 816; 17.2%) as those without CUD (151 of 816; 18.5%) (p = 0.477). Patients with CUD also had similar anastomotic leak rates (CUD: 5.64% vs. No CUD: 6.25%; p = 0.601), hospital lengths of stay (CUD: 5 days, IQR 4-7 vs. No CUD: 5 days, IQR 4-7) (p = 0.415), and hospital charges as those without CUD. Similar findings were seen among patients aged ≥50 years in the subgroup analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Though the prevalence of CUD has increased drastically over the past 15 years, preoperative CUD was not associated with an increased risk of composite morbidity among adult patients undergoing an elective colectomy.

National trends and outcomes of total proctocolectomy and completion proctectomy ileal pouch-anal anastomosis procedures for ulcerative colitis.

AIM: The purpose of this study is to assess US operative trends and outcomes of ulcerative colitis (UC) patients undergoing total proctocolectomy with ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (TPC-IPAA) or completion proctectomy with IPAA (CP-IPAA). METHODS: Adult UC patients who underwent TPC-IPAA or CP-IPAA were analysed retrospectively using the 2016-2020 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Factors associated with 30-day overall and serious morbidity were identified using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 1696 patients were identified, with 958 patients (56.5%) undergoing TPC-IPAA and 738 (43.5%) undergoing CP-IPAA. A greater proportion of TPC-IPAAs were performed each year (except in 2019) compared to CP-IPAAs over the study period (P trend <0.001). Unadjusted analysis showed comparable rates of overall (20.8% vs. 24.4%, P = 0.076) and serious morbidity (14.3% vs. 12.7%, P = 0.352) between TPC-IPAA and CP-IPAA patients. Robotic TPC-IPAA had no differences in complications compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. Robotic CP-IPAA had higher anastomotic leak rates and longer hospital length of stay compared to laparoscopic and open approaches. Obesity was associated with increased odds of overall and serious morbidity for patients who underwent TPC-IPAA. Steroid/immunosuppressive therapy was associated with increased odds of overall and serious morbidity for patients who underwent CP-IPAA. CONCLUSIONS: Obese patients should be informed of their increased morbidity risk and offered counselling on weight loss prior to surgery when feasible. Patients on steroid/immunosuppressive therapy within 30 days preoperatively should not undergo CP-IPAA or should delay surgery until they can be safely off those medications.

Surgical and local control outcomes after sequential short-course radiation therapy and chemotherapy for rectal cancer.

Background: Total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT) is an accepted approach for the management of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and is associated with a decreased risk of development of metastatic disease compared to standard neoadjuvant therapy. However, questions remain regarding surgical outcomes and local control in patients who proceed to surgery, particularly when radiation is given first in the neoadjuvant sequence. We report on our institution's experience with patients who underwent short-course radiation therapy, consolidation chemotherapy, and surgery. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed surgical specimen outcomes, postoperative complications, and local/pelvic control in a large cohort of patients with LARC who underwent neoadjuvant therapy incorporating upfront short-course radiation therapy followed by consolidation chemotherapy. Results: In our cohort of 83 patients who proceeded to surgery, a complete/near-complete mesorectal specimen was achieved in 90 % of patients. This outcome was not associated with the time interval from completion of radiation to surgery. Postoperative complications were acceptably low. Local control at two years was 93.4 % for all patients- 97.6 % for those with low-risk disease and 90.4 % for high-risk disease. Conclusion: Upfront short-course radiation therapy and consolidation chemotherapy is an effective treatment course. Extended interval from completion of short-course radiation therapy did not impact surgical specimen quality.

Use of a cholangioscope for appendixoscopy and detecting a residual appendiceal adenoma.

Video 1Use of a cholangioscope for appendixoscopy and detecting a residual appendiceal adenoma.

Feasibility of robotic multivisceral resections in colorectal cancer patients: a NSQIP-based study.

Multivisceral robotic surgery may be an alternative to sequential procedures in select patients with colorectal cancer who are diagnosed with synchronous lesions or in those who require additional procedures at the time of resection. The aim of this study was to assess utilization of the robot for multivisceral resections and compare the surgical outcomes of this approach to laparoscopic resections. Adult colorectal surgery patients who underwent a colectomy or proctectomy and a concurrent abdominal surgery procedure in the American College of Surgeons NSQIP database (2016-2021) were included. The primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative overall and serious morbidity. Factors associated with morbidity were assessed using a multivariable logistic regression. Of the 3875 patients who underwent simultaneous multivisceral resections, 397 (10.3%) underwent a robotic approach and 962 (24.8%) a laparoscopic approach. Gynecological procedures (38%) comprised the largest proportion of concurrent procedures followed by hepatic resections (18%). On unadjusted analysis, rates of overall morbidity (25.4% vs. 30.0%) and serious morbidity (12.1% vs 12.0%) did not differ between the robotic and laparoscopic approach groups, respectively. The rate of conversion to open was lower for the robotic compared to laparoscopic approach (9.3% vs. 28.8%, p < 0.001), and length of stay was shorter (4 vs. 5, p < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, there was no significant difference in overall (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.16, p = 0.34) or serious morbidity (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.75-1.65, p = 0.59) between the two approaches even after concurrent procedure risk stratification. Robotic multivisceral resections can be performed with acceptable overall and serious morbidity in select patients with colorectal cancer. Rates of conversion and length of stay may be decreased with a robotic approach, and future research is needed to determine the optimal operative approach in this patient population.

Impact of preoperative chemotherapy on perioperative morbidity in combined resection of colon cancer and liver metastases.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemotherapy, or neoadjuvant therapy (NAC) can be used to improve resectability but can also have hepatotoxic effects on the future liver remnant. The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of NAC on 30-day morbidity among patients undergoing a resection of primary colon cancer and synchronous liver metastases (sLM). METHODS: This was a retrospective study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2012-2020). The association between NAC and 30-day overall morbidity, the primary outcome, was assessed. Subgroup analyses for low and high-risk procedures were performed. RESULTS: Among 968 patients who underwent the combined resection, 571 (58.99%) received NAC. There was a lower rate of 30-day overall morbidity among patients who received NAC (34.50% vs. 41.56%, p = 0.026) and no difference in rates of postoperative liver failure, bile leak, need for invasive intervention for hepatic procedure, and anastomotic leak. On adjusted analyses, patients who received NAC had decreased odds of overall morbidity (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.97, p = 0.031) compared to patients who did not receive NAC. On subgroup analyses, patients who received NAC prior to a low risk combined resection had lower rates of overall morbidity on both adjusted and unadjusted analyses. Among those undergoing high-risk combined resections, there was no difference in overall morbidity. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Patients who are deemed to be candidates for preoperative chemotherapy can proceed with planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy prior to combined resection of primary colon cancer and sLM as preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not appear to be associated with increased postoperative morbidity.

Procedure-specific risks of robotic simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases.

An estimated 25% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with distant metastases at the time of diagnosis, the most common site being the liver. Although prior studies have reported that a simultaneous approach to resections in these patients can lead to increased rates of complications, emerging literature shows that minimally invasive surgical (MIS) approaches can mitigate this additional morbidity. This is the first study utilizing a large national database to investigate colorectal and hepatic procedure-specific risks in robotic simultaneous resections for CRC and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP targeted colectomy, proctectomy, and hepatectomy files, 1,721 patients were identified who underwent simultaneous resections of CRC and CRLM from 2016 to 2021. Of these patients, 345 (20%) underwent resections by an MIS approach, defined as either laparoscopic (n = 266, 78%) or robotic (n = 79, 23%). Patients who underwent robotic resections had lower rates of ileus compared to those who had open surgeries. The robotic group had similar rates of 30-day anastomotic leak, bile leak, hepatic failure, and post-operative invasive hepatic procedures compared to both the open and laparoscopic groups. The rate of conversion to open (8% vs. 22%, p = 0.004) and median LOS (5 vs. 6 days, p = 0.022) was significantly lower for robotic compared to laparoscopic group. This study, which is the largest national cohort of simultaneous CRC and CRLM resections, supports the safety and potential benefits of a robotic approach in these patients.

Simultaneous resection of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases: A risk stratified analysis of the NSQIP database.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Over 25% of patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) will develop colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Controversy exists over the surgical management of these patients. This study aims to investigate the safety of a simultaneous surgical approach by stratifying patients based on procedure risk and operative approach. METHODS: Using ACS-NSQIP (2016-2020), patients with CRC who underwent isolated colorectal, isolated hepatic, or simultaneous resections were identified. Colorectal and hepatic procedures were stratified by morbidity risk (high vs. low) and operative approach (open vs. minimally invasive). Thirty-day overall morbidity was compared between risk matched isolated and simultaneous resection groups. RESULTS: A total of 65 417 patients were identified, with 1550 (2.4%) undergoing simultaneous resections. A total of 1207 (77.9%) underwent a low-risk colorectal and low-risk liver resection. On multivariate analysis, there was no significant difference in overall morbidity between patients who had a simultaneous open high-risk colorectal/low-risk hepatic procedure compared to patients who had an isolated open high-risk colorectal procedure (odds ratio: 1.19; 95% confidence interval: 0.94-1.50; p = 0.148). All other combinations of simultaneous procedures had statistically significant higher rates of morbidity than the isolated group. CONCLUSIONS: Simultaneous resection of colorectal and synchronous CRLM is associated with an increased risk of morbidity in most circumstances in a risk stratified analysis, although rates of readmission and reoperation were not increased. Minimally invasive surgical approaches may significantly mitigate this morbidity.

Procedure-Specific Risks of Robotic Simultaneous Resection of Colorectal Cancer and Synchronous Liver Metastases.

An estimated 25% of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) present with distant metastases at the time of diagnosis, the most common site being the liver. Controversy exists regarding the safety of a simultaneous versus staged approach to resections in these patients, but reports have shown that minimally invasive surgery (MIS) approaches can mitigate morbidity. This is the first study utilizing a large national database to investigate colorectal and hepatic procedure-specific risks in robotic simultaneous resections for CRC and colorectal liver metastases (CRLM). Utilizing the ACS-NSQIP targeted colectomy, proctectomy, and hepatectomy files, 1,550 patients were identified who underwent simultaneous resections of CRC and CRLM from 2016-2020. Of these patients, 311 (20%) underwent resections by an MIS approach, defined as an either laparoscopic (n = 241, 78%) or robotic (n = 70, 23%). Patients who underwent robotic resections had lower rates of ileus compared to those who had an open surgery. The robotic group had similar rates of 30-day anastomotic leak, bile leak, hepatic failure, and post operative invasive hepatic procedures compared to both the open and laparoscopic groups. The rate of conversion to open was significantly lower for robotic compared to laparoscopic group (9% vs. 22%, p = 0.012). This report is the largest study to date of robotic simultaneous CRC and CRLM resections reported in the literature and supports the safety and potential benefits of this approach.

Safety and Feasibility of ≤24-h Short-Stay Right Colectomies for Primary Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Hospital length of stay (LOS) has been used as a surgical quality metric. This study seeks to determine the safety and feasibility of right colectomy as a ≤24-h short-stay procedure for colon cancer patients. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study using the ACS-NSQIP database and its Procedure Targeted Colectomy database (2012-2020). Adult patients with colon cancer who underwent right colectomies were identified. Patients were categorized into LOS ≤1 day (≤24-h short-stay), LOS 2-4 days, LOS 5-6 days, and LOS ≥7 days groups. Primary outcomes were 30-day overall and serious morbidity. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality, readmission, and anastomotic leak. The association between LOS and overall and serious morbidity was assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: 19,401 adult patients were identified, with 371 patients (1.9%) undergoing short-stay right colectomies. Patients undergoing short-stay surgery were generally younger with fewer comorbidities. Overall morbidity for the short-stay group was 6.5%, compared to 11.3%, 23.4%, and 42.0% for LOS 2-4 days, LOS 5-6 days, and LOS ≥7 days groups, respectively (p < 0.001). There were no differences in anastomotic leak, mortality, and readmission rates in the short-stay group compared to patients with LOS 2-4 days. Patients with LOS 2-4 days had increased odds of overall morbidity (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.10-2.65, p = 0.016) compared to patients with short-stay but no differences in odds of serious morbidity (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.61-2.36, p = 0.590). CONCLUSIONS: ≤24-h short-stay right colectomy is safe and feasible for a highly-select group of colon cancer patients. Optimizing patients preoperatively and implementing targeted readmission prevention strategies may aid patient selection.

Colorectal Surgery Outcomes in the United States During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to assess colorectal surgery outcomes, discharge destination, and readmission in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Adult colorectal surgery patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2019-2020) and its colectomy and proctectomy procedure-targeted files were included. The prepandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019. The pandemic time period was defined from April 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 in quarterly intervals (Q2 April-June; Q3 July-September; Q4 October-December). Factors associated with morbidity and in-hospital mortality were assessed using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 62,393 patients, 34,810 patients (55.8%) underwent colorectal surgery prepandemic and 27,583 (44.2%) during the pandemic. Patients who had surgery during the pandemic had higher American Society of Anesthesiologists class and presented more frequently with dependent functional status. The proportion of emergent surgeries increased (12.7% prepandemic versus 15.2% pandemic, P < 0.001), with less laparoscopic cases (54.0% versus 51.0%, P < 0.001). Higher rates of morbidity with a greater proportion of discharges to home and lesser proportion of discharges to skilled care facilities were observed with no considerable differences in length of stay or worsening readmission rates. Multivariable analysis demonstrated increased odds of overall and serious morbidity and in-hospital mortality, during Q3 and/or Q4 of the 2020 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in hospital presentation, inpatient care, and discharge disposition of colorectal surgery patients were observed during the COVID-19 pandemic. Pandemic responses should emphasize balancing resource allocation, educating patients and providers on timely medical workup and management, and optimizing discharge coordination pathways.

Use of fluorescence imaging and indocyanine green during colorectal surgery: Results of an intercontinental Delphi survey.

BACKGROUND: Fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green is increasingly being used in colorectal surgery to assess anastomotic perfusion, and to detect sentinel lymph nodes. METHODS: In this 2-round, online, Delphi survey, 35 international experts were asked to vote on 69 statements pertaining to patient preparation and contraindications to fluorescence imaging during colorectal surgery, indications, technical aspects, potential advantages/disadvantages, and effectiveness versus limitations, and training and research. Methodological steps were adopted during survey design to minimize risk of bias. RESULTS: More than 70% consensus was reached on 60 of 69 statements, including moderate-strong consensus regarding fluorescence imaging's value assessing anastomotic perfusion and leak risk, but not on its value mapping sentinel nodes. Similarly, although consensus was reached regarding most technical aspects of its use assessing anastomoses, little consensus was achieved for lymph-node assessments. Evaluating anastomoses, experts agreed that the optimum total indocyanine green dose and timing are 5 to 10 mg and 30 to 60 seconds pre-evaluation, indocyanine green should be dosed milligram/kilogram, lines should be flushed with saline, and indocyanine green can be readministered if bright perfusion is not achieved, although how long surgeons should wait remains unknown. The only consensus achieved for lymph-node assessments was that 2 to 4 injection points are needed. Ninety-six percent and 100% consensus were reached that fluorescence imaging will increase in practice and research over the next decade, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although further research remains necessary, fluorescence imaging appears to have value assessing anastomotic perfusion, but its value for lymph-node mapping remains questionable.

Nonoperative Management Following Complete Response in Rectal Cancer After Short-course Radiation Therapy and Consolidation Chemotherapy: Clinical Outcomes and Quality of Life Measures.

PURPOSE: The purpose of his study was to report on a cohort of patients managed with nonoperative management (NOM) with a watch-and-wait strategy after achieving complete response (CR) to sequential short-course radiation therapy (SCRT) and consolidation chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of patients treated SCRT and chemotherapy who achieved a CR and were managed with NOM. Bowel function was assessed with European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30, EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire-Colorectal Cancer 29, and the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) questionnaires. Endpoints included overall survival (OS), freedom from local failure (FFLF), freedom from distant metastasis, and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients met inclusion criteria. Seven (26.9%) patients developed local failure at a median of 6.8 months following CR, of which 5 were successfully salvaged. Median FFLF was not reached, with 6-month, 1-, and 2-year FFLF rates of 100.0%, 82.3%, and 71.3%. Median OS was not reached, with 6-month, 1-, and 2-year OS rates of 100%. Median DFS was not reached, with 6-month, 1-, and 2-year DFS rates of 100%, 95.0%, and 89.4%. Questionnaire response rate was 83.3%. Median LARS score was 27. Major, minor, and no LARS occurred in 3 (20%), 6 (40%), and 6 (40%) patients, respectively. There were no differences in questionnaire scores between patients who had the majority of their anal sphincter complex irradiated and those who did not. CONCLUSION: NOM with a watch-and-wait strategy is safe and feasible in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve CR after sequential SCRT and chemotherapy, with evidence for good anorectal function.

Decreasing Readmissions After Ileostomy Creation Through a Perioperative Quality Improvement Program.

BACKGROUND: Readmission after ileostomy creation in patients undergoing colorectal surgery creates a significant burden on health care cost and patient quality of care, with a 30-day readmission rate of 40%. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of our perioperative quality improvement program, Decreasing Readmissions After Ileostomy Creation. DESIGN: Perioperative interventions were administered to patients who underwent ileostomy creation. SETTINGS: A single tertiary care academic center. PATIENTS: Eighty patients participated in this program from February 2020 to January 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were 30-day readmission rates and causes of readmission, which were compared to a historical national database. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the effectiveness of this quality improvement program. RESULTS: Eighty patients were enrolled in this prospective quality improvement program. The mean age was 52 (±15.06) years. The most common indication for patients undergoing creation of an ileostomy was colorectal cancer (40%; n = 32). The overall 30-day readmission rate was 8.75% (n = 7) throughout the study period, which was significantly lower than historical cohort data (20.10%; p = 0.01). Among the 7 readmitted patients, 3 (3.75%) were readmitted due to dehydration. The most significant associated risk factor for all-cause readmission was urgent/emergent operative status, which was associated with an increased risk of readmission ( p = 0.01). The 3 readmitted patients with dehydration had a mean Dehydration Readmission After Ileostomy Prediction risk score of 11.71 points, compared to 9.59 points in nondehydrated patients, who did not require readmission ( p = 0.38). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its small sample size (N = 80). CONCLUSIONS: The Decreasing Readmissions After Ileostomy Creation program has been successful in reducing both the all-cause readmission rate and readmission due to dehydration both within an academic tertiary care referral center and in comparison with historical readmission rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B894 . DISMINUCIN DE LA READMISIN DESPUS DE LA CREACIN DE UNA ILEOSTOMA MEDIANTE UN PROGRAMA DE MEJORA DE LA CALIDAD PERIOPERATORIA: ANTECEDENTES:La readmisión después de la creación de una ileostomía en pacientes de cirugía colorrectal crea una carga significativa sobre el costo de la atención médica y la calidad de la atención del paciente, con una tasa de readmisión a los 30 días que llega al 40%.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo evaluar la implementación de nuestro programa de mejora de la calidad perioperatoria que disminuyen los reingresos después de la creación de ileostomía.DISEÑO:Se administraron intervenciones perioperatorias a pacientes que se sometieron a la creación de una ileostomía.AJUSTE:Se trataba de un único centro académico de atención terciaria.PACIENTES:Participaron 80 pacientes en este programa desde febrero de 2020 hasta enero de 2021.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los principales resultados medidos fueron las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días y las causas de reingreso, que se compararon con una base de datos histórica nacional. Se utilizaron estadísticas descriptivas para evaluar la eficacia de este programa de mejora de la calidad.RESULTADOS:Ochenta pacientes se inscribieron en este programa prospectivo de mejora de la calidad. La edad media fue de 52 (± 15,06) años. La indicación más común para los pacientes que se sometieron a la creación de una ileostomía fue el cáncer colorrectal (40%, n = 32). La tasa general de reingreso a los 30 días fue del 8,75% (n = 7) durante todo el período de estudio, lo que fue significativamente más bajo que los datos históricos de la cohorte (20,10%, p = 0,01). Entre los 7 pacientes readmitidos, tres (3,75%) fueron readmitidos por deshidratación. El factor de riesgo asociado más significativo para la readmisión por todas las causas fue el estado operatorio urgente / emergencia, que se asoció con un mayor riesgo de readmisión (p = 0,01). Los tres pacientes readmitidos con deshidratación tuvieron una puntuación de riesgo promedio de readmisión por deshidratación después de la predicción de ileostomía de 11,71 puntos, en comparación con los pacientes no deshidratados, que no requirieron readmisión (media, 9,59 puntos, p = 0,38).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su pequeño tamaño de muestra (n = 80).CONCLUSIONES:El programa de disminución de las readmisiones después de la creación de una ileostomía ha logrado reducir tanto la tasa de readmisión por todas las causas como la readmisión por deshidratación, tanto dentro de un centro académico de referencia de atención terciaria como en comparación con las tasas históricas de readmisión. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B894 . (Traducción-Dr Yolanda Colorado ).

Preoperative Opioid Dose and Surgical Outcomes in Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The worsening opioid epidemic has led to an increased number of surgical patients with chronic preoperative opioid use. However, the impact of opioids on perioperative outcomes has yet to be fully elucidated. The purpose of this study was to assess the association between preoperative opioid dose and surgical outcomes among colectomy patients. METHODS: Adult colectomy patients in the IBM MarketScan database (2010-2017) were stratified based on preoperative opioid dose, calculated as the average opioid dose in morphine milligram equivalents (MME) in the 90 days prior to surgery: 0 MME, 1 to 49 MME, and 50 or more MME. The association between preoperative opioid dose and anastomotic leak, the primary outcome of interest, as well as other postoperative complications, was assessed using multivariable regression. RESULTS: Among 45,515 adult colectomy patients, 71.4% did not use opioids (0 MME), 27.4% had an opioid dose between 1 and 49 MME, and 1.2% had an opioid dose at or above 50 MME. Patients with preoperative opioid use exhibited a higher incidence of anastomotic leak (0 MME: 4.8%, 1-49 MME: 5.5%, ≥50 MME: 8.3%; p trend = 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated a dose-response relationship between preoperative opioids and surgical outcomes, as the odds of anastomotic leak worsened with increasing opioid dose (1-49 MME: OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.08-1.31, p < 0.001; ≥50 MME: OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.20-2.24, p = 0.002). Similar dose-response relationships were seen after risk-adjustment for lung complications, pneumonia, delirium, and 30-day readmission (p < 0.05 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Providers should exercise caution when prescribing opioids preoperatively, as increasing doses of preoperative opioids were associated with worse surgical outcomes and higher 30-day readmission among adult colectomy patients.

Mutant KRAS as a prognostic biomarker after hepatectomy for rectal cancer metastases: Does the primary disease site matter?

BACKGROUND: The prognostic implication of mutant KRAS (mKRAS) among patients with primary disease in the rectum remains unknown. METHODS: From 2000 to 2018, patients undergoing hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases at 10 collaborating international institutions with documented KRAS status were surveyed. RESULTS: A total of 834 (65.8%) patients with primary colon cancer and 434 (34.2%) patients with primary rectal cancer were included. In patients with primary colon cancer, mKRAS served as a reliable prognostic biomarker of poor overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.58, 95% CI 1.28-1.95) in the multivariable analysis. Although a trend towards significance was noted, mKRAS was not found to be an independent predictor of OS in patients with primary rectal tumors (HR 1.34, 95% CI 0.98-1.80). For colon cancer, the specific codon impacted in mKRAS appears to reflect underlying disease biology and oncologic outcomes, with codon 13 being associated with particularly poor OS in patients with left-sided tumors (codon 12, HR 1.56, 95% CI 1.22-1.99; codon 13, HR 2.10 95% CI 1.43-3.08;). Stratifying the rectal patient population by codon mutation did not confer prognostic significance following hepatectomy. CONCLUSIONS: While the left-sided colonic disease is frequently grouped with rectal disease, our analysis suggests that there exist fundamental biologic differences that drive disparate outcomes. Although there was a trend toward significance of KRAS mutations for patients with primary rectal cancers, it failed to achieve statistical significance.

Converting laparoscopic colectomies to open is associated with similar outcomes as a planned open approach among Crohn's disease patients.

PURPOSE: There has been a noted reluctance to offer laparoscopic surgery to Crohn's Disease patients due to the potential risks, and high rate, of converting the procedure to open. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes between Crohn's Disease patients undergoing a planned open colectomy, to those undergoing a laparoscopic colectomy that was converted to open. METHODS: Crohn's Disease patients undergoing an elective colectomy were identified using the ACS-NSQIP database (2012-2019). Patients were stratified based on operative approach: open, laparoscopic, and laparoscopic converted to open. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the impact of conversion to open on overall and serious postoperative morbidity. RESULTS: Among 8039 elective colectomies, 40.5% were performed open, 46.9% were completed laparoscopically, and 12.6% were converted to open. The conversion rate among all laparoscopic cases was 21.3%. On unadjusted analysis, conversion to open demonstrated similar rates of overall morbidity (P = 0.355) and serious morbidity (P = 0.724) compared to a planned open approach. On multivariable analysis, conversion to open was not associated with increased odds of overall morbidity (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.94-1.30, P = 0.238) or serious morbidity (OR 1.20, 95% CI 0.98-1.46, P = 0.074), when compared to an open approach. CONCLUSION: Among Crohn's Disease patients, cases converted from laparoscopic to open exhibited similar outcomes as a planned open approach. Despite the limitations associated with this retrospective study, our findings suggest that laparoscopic surgery may be safely pursued among Crohn's Disease patients, as the risks of conversion are potentially balanced by the benefits of laparoscopic surgery.

Do Cost Limitations of Extended Prophylaxis After Surgery Apply to Ulcerative Colitis Patients?

BACKGROUND: Colorectal surgery patients with ulcerative colitis are at increased risk of postoperative venous thromboembolism. Extended prophylaxis for thromboembolism prevention has been used in colorectal surgery patients, but it has been criticized for its lack of cost-effectiveness. However, the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis for postoperative ulcerative colitis patients may be unique. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of extended prophylaxis in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients. DESIGN: A decision analysis compared costs and benefits in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients with and without extended prophylaxis over a lifetime horizon. SETTING: Assumptions for decision analysis were identified from available literature for a typical ulcerative colitis patient's risk of thrombosis, age at surgery, type of thrombosis, prophylaxis risk reduction, bleeding complications, and mortality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Costs ($) and benefits (quality-adjusted life year) reflected a societal perspective and were time-discounted at 3%. Costs and benefits were combined to produce the main outcome measure, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($ per quality-adjusted life year). Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis modeled uncertainty in probabilities, costs, and disutilities. RESULTS: Using reference parameters, the individual expected societal total cost of care was $957 without and $1775 with prophylaxis (not cost-effective; $257,280 per quality-adjusted life year). Preventing a single mortality with prophylaxis would cost $5 million (number needed to treat: 6134 individuals). Adjusting across a range of scenarios upheld these conclusions 77% of the time. With further sensitivity testing, venous thromboembolism cumulative risk (>1.5%) and ePpx regimen pricing (<$299) were the 2 parameters most sensitive to uncertainty. LIMITATIONS: Recommendations of decision analysis methodology are limited to group decision-making, not an individual risk profile. CONCLUSION: Routine ePpx in postoperative ulcerative colitis patients is not cost-effective. This finding is sensitive to higher-than-average rates of venous thromboembolism and low-cost prophylaxis opportunities. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818. SE APLICAN LAS LIMITACIONES DE COSTOS DE LA PROFILAXIS PROLONGADA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA A LOS PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA: ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes de cirugía colorrectal con colitis ulcerosa tienen un mayor riesgo de tromboembolismo venoso posoperatorio. La profilaxis extendida para la prevención de la tromboembolia se ha utilizado en pacientes con cirugía colorrectal, aunque ha sido criticada por su falta de rentabilidad. Sin embargo, la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada para los pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa puede ser aceptable.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la rentabilidad de la profilaxis prolongada en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa.DISEÑO:Un análisis de decisiones comparó los costos y beneficios en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa con y sin profilaxis prolongada de por vida.AJUSTE:Los supuestos para el análisis de decisiones se identificaron a partir de la literatura disponible para el riesgo de trombosis de un paciente con colitis ulcerosa típica, la edad al momento de la cirugía, el tipo de trombosis, la reducción del riesgo con profilaxis, las complicaciones hemorrágicas y la mortalidad.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los costos ($) y los beneficios (año de vida ajustado por calidad) reflejaron una perspectiva social y se descontaron en el tiempo al 3%. Los costos y los beneficios se combinaron para producir la principal medida de resultado, la relación costo-efectividad incremental ($ por año de vida ajustado por calidad). El análisis de sensibilidad probabilística multivariable modeló la incertidumbre en probabilidades, costos y desutilidades.RESULTADOS:Utilizando parámetros de referencia, el costo total de atención social esperado individual fue de $957 sin profilaxis y $1775 con profilaxis (no rentable; $257,280 por año de vida ajustado por calidad). La prevención de una sola mortalidad con profilaxis costaría $5.0 millones (número necesario a tratar: 6.134 personas). El ajuste en una variedad de escenarios mantuvo estas conclusiones el 77% de las veces. Con más pruebas de sensibilidad, el riesgo acumulado de TEV (>1,5%) y el precio del régimen de ePpx (<$299) fueron los dos parámetros más sensibles a la incertidumbre.LIMITACIONES:Las recomendaciones de la metodología de análisis de decisiones se limitan a la toma de decisiones en grupo, no a un perfil de riesgo individual.CONCLUSIÓN:La profilaxis extendida de rutina en pacientes posoperados con colitis ulcerosa no es rentable. Este hallazgo es sensible a tasas de TEV superiores al promedio y oportunidades de profilaxis de bajo costo. Consulted Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B818. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio).

The Impact of Surgical Delays on Short- and Long-Term Survival Among Colon Cancer Patients.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of surgical delays on short- and long-term survival among colon cancer patients. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing surgery for stage I, II, or III colon cancer were identified from the National Cancer Database (2010-2016). After categorization by wait times from diagnosis to surgery (<1 week, 1-3 weeks, 3-6 weeks, 6-9 weeks, 9-12 weeks, and >12 weeks), 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and 5-year overall survival were compared between patients both overall and after stratification by pathological disease stage. RESULTS: Among 187 394 colon cancer patients, 24.2% waited <1 week, 30.5% waited 1-3 weeks, 29.0% waited 3-6 weeks, 9.7% waited 6-9 weeks, 3.3% waited 9-12 weeks, and 3.3% waited >12 weeks for surgery. Patients undergoing surgery 3-6 weeks after colon cancer diagnosis exhibited the best 30-day mortality (1.3%), 90-day mortality (2.3%), and 5-year overall survival (71.8%) (P < .001 for all). After risk-adjusting for confounders, all wait times beyond 6 weeks were associated with worse 5-year overall survival (6-9 weeks: HR 1.10, 95% CI 1.06-1.15; 9-12 weeks: HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.18-1.33; >12 weeks: HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.35-1.52; P < .001 for all). Subgroup analysis after stratification by disease stage demonstrated that patients with stage III colon cancer were able to wait up to 9 weeks before exhibiting worse 5-year overall survival, compared to 6 weeks for patients with stage I or II disease. CONCLUSIONS: Colon cancer patients should undergo surgery 3-6 weeks after diagnosis, as all surgical delays beyond 6 weeks were associated with worse 30-day mortality, 90-day mortality, and 5-year overall survival.