Rediversion of the Failing Ileoanal Pouch: First Step in Pouch Salvage?

BACKGROUND: Ileal pouch-anal anastomosis is a technically demanding procedure with many potential complications. Rediversion with an ileostomy is often the first step in pouch salvage; however, it may not be clear if an individual patient will undergo subsequent pouch salvage surgery. We aimed to describe the indications and short- and long-term outcomes of rediversion in our pouch registry. METHODS: We queried our institutional pouch registry for patients who underwent index 2- or 3-stage IPAA and subsequent rediversion at our institution between 1985 and 2022. Pouches constructed elsewhere, rediverted elsewhere, or those patients who underwent pouch salvage/excision without prior rediversion were excluded. Patients were selected for pouch salvage according to the surgeon's discretion. RESULTS: Overall, 177 patients (3.4% of 5207 index pouches) were rediverted. At index pouch, median patient age was 32 years and 50.8% were women. Diagnoses included ulcerative colitis (86.4%), indeterminate colitis (6.2%), familial adenomatous polyposis (4.0%), and others (3.4%). Median time from prior ileostomy closure to rediversion was 7.2 years. Indications for rediversion were inflammatory in 98 (55.4%) and noninflammatory in 79 (44.6%) patients. After rediversion, 52% underwent pouch salvage, 30% had no further surgery, and 18.1% underwent pouch excision. The 5-year pouch survival rates for inflammatory and noninflammatory indications were 71.5% and 94.5%, respectively (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Rediversion of ileoanal pouches is a safe initial strategy to manage failing pouches and is a useful first step in pouch salvage in many patients. Subsequent salvage surgery for noninflammatory indications had a significantly higher pouch salvage rate than those rediverted for inflammatory complications.

Rediversion with an ileostomy was a safe, useful first step in pouch salvage, and subsequent salvage surgery for noninflammatory indications had a significantly higher pouch salvage rate than those rediverted for inflammatory complications.

Operative management of anastomotic leak after sigmoid colectomy for left-sided diverticular disease: Ileostomy creation may be as safe as colostomy creation.

AIM: The management of anastomotic leak after sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease has not been well defined. Specifically, there is a lack of literature on optimal types of reoperations for leaks. The aim of this study was to describe and compare reoperative approaches and their postoperative outcomes. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the NSQIP Colectomy Module (2012-2019) and single-institution chart review. Patients with diverticular disease who underwent elective sigmoid colectomy were included. Primary outcomes were anastomotic leak requiring reoperation and management of anastomotic leak. RESULTS: Of 37,471 patients who underwent sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease, 1003 (2.7%) suffered an anastomotic leak, of whom 583 underwent reoperation. Of the 572 patients who were not initially diverted and underwent reoperation for leak, 302 (52.8%) were managed with stoma creation - 200 (35.0%) with colostomy and 102 (17.8%) with ileostomy. The remaining 47.2% underwent colectomy with reanastomosis, suturing of large bowel, and drainage. There were no differences in length of stay, readmission, or mortality between patients who underwent ileostomy or colostomy at reoperation (p > 0.05). Single-institution analysis demonstrated that 100% of patients with ileostomies underwent subsequent ileostomy closure, compared to 60% of patients with colostomies. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who suffer anastomotic leaks after sigmoid colectomy for diverticular disease and undergo reoperations, ileostomy at the time of reoperation appears to be safe, with comparable results to colostomy. Ileostomies were more frequently closed than colostomies. When faced with a colorectal anastomotic leak, ileostomy creation may be considered.

Venous thromboembolism risk stratification for patients undergoing surgery for IBD using a novel six factor scoring system using NSQIP-IBD registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing colorectal surgery for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) are recognized to have an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of this study was to determine the perioperative risk factors for VTE and to create a predictive scoring system for VTE in the IBD cohort. METHODS: The NSQIP-IBD Collaboration Registry from 2017 to 2020 was used to identify patients. Demographics, operative and outcomes data of IBD patients undergoing surgeries for IBD were analysed. A logistic multivariate regression model was performed using all significant variables to develop a predictive scoring system of VTE. RESULTS: Five-thousand and three patients (51.9% male, mean age: 42.7, 42.7% ulcerative colitis) were included in the study. 125 (2.49%) developed VTE. On multivariate analysis ASA grade, ulcerative colitis, sepsis, serum sodium <139 mmol/L, an open abdomen and preoperative inter hospital transfer were associated with greater risk of VTE. Using these 6 significant factors, a risk model was constructed. The risk of VTE with one risk factor was 0.7% and 1.8% with two risk factors. The risk of VTE increased to 3.6% and 4.5% with three and four risk factors respectively. With five and six risk factors, the risk of VTE increased exponentially to 10.9% and 25% respectively. CONCLUSION: This study shows that there are cumulative risk factors which increase the risk of VTE after surgery for IBD. The risk increases exponentially with more than five risk factors, and extended chemoprophylaxis may not be enough in reducing this risk.

Mediating Factors Between Race and Time to Treatment in Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous disparities research has demonstrated that underrepresented racial minority patients have worse colorectal cancer outcomes and that they experience unnecessary delays in time to treatment. These delays may explain worse colorectal cancer outcomes for minority patients and serve as a marker of inequalities in our healthcare system. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to quantify the mechanisms that contribute to this disparity in treatment delay. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of colorectal cancer patients who underwent elective resection from 2004 to 2017. A causal inference mediation analysis using the counterfactual framework was utilized to estimate the extent to which racial disparities among patient factors explain the racial disparities in time to treatment. Mediators included income, education, comorbidities, insurance, and hospital type. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at hospitals participating in the National Cancer Database. PATIENTS: Stage I-III colorectal cancer patients, ≥18 years old, who underwent elective resection from 2004 through 2017 were included. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: The primary measures were indirect effects of mediators between race and delayed time to treatment. RESULTS: Of the 504,405 patients (370,051 colon and 134,354 rectal), 10%, 5%, and 4% were black, Hispanic, and other. In multivariable models, compared to white patients, these patients had 25%, 27%, and 17% greater odds of delayed treatment. Mediation analyses suggested that 43%, 20%, and 31% of the treatment delay among them could be removed if an intervention equalized income, education, comorbidities, insurance, and hospital type to that of white patients. Treatment at an academic hospital explained 15% to 32% of the racial disparity and was the most potent mediator. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective design and failure to capture all meaningful mediators. CONCLUSIONS: Black, Hispanic, and other colorectal cancer patients experience treatment delays when compared to white patients. Equalization of the mediators used in this study could reduce treatment delays by 20% to 43% depending on the racial/ethnic group. Future research should identify other causes of racial disparities in treatment delay and intervene accordingly. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B871 . FACTORES MEDIADORES ENTRE LA RAZA Y EL TIEMPO HASTA EL TRATAMIENTO EN EL CNCER COLORECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Investigaciones anteriores sobre disparidades han demostrado que los pacientes de minorías raciales subrepresentados tienen peores resultados de cáncer colorrectal y que experimentan retrasos innecesarios en el tiempo de tratamiento. Estos retrasos pueden explicar los peores resultados del cáncer colorrectal para los pacientes de minorías y servir como un marcador de desigualdades en nuestro sistema de salud.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo cuantificar los mecanismos que contribuyen a esta disparidad en el retraso del tratamiento.DISEÑO:Este es un análisis retrospectivo de pacientes con cáncer colorrectal que se sometieron a resección electiva entre 2004 y 2017. Se utilizó un análisis de mediación de inferencia causal utilizando el marco contra factual para estimar hasta qué punto las disparidades raciales entre los factores del paciente explican las disparidades raciales en el tiempo hasta el tratamiento. Los mediadores incluyeron ingresos económicos, educación, comorbilidades, seguro médico y tipo de hospital.AJUSTES:Este estudio se realizó en hospitales que participan en la Base de datos nacional del cáncer.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes con cáncer colorrectal en estadio I-III, ≥18 años, que se sometieron a resección electiva entre 2004 y 2017.PRINCIPALES RESULTADOS MEDIDAS:Las principales mediciones fueron el efecto indirecto de los mediadores entre la raza y el retraso en el tratamiento.RESULTADOS:De los 504,405 pacientes (370,051 de colon, 134,354 rectal), 10%, 5%, 4% eran negros, hispanos, y otros, respectivamente. En modelos multivariables, en comparación con los pacientes blancos, estos pacientes tenían un 25%, 27%, y 17% más de probabilidades de retrasar el tratamiento. Los análisis de medición sugirieron que el 43%, 20%, 31% del retraso del tratamiento entre, respectivamente, podría eliminarse si una intervención igualara los ingresos económicos, la educación, las comorbilidades, el seguro médico y el tipo de hospital a los de los pacientes blancos. El tratamiento en un hospital académico demostró entre el 15% y el 32% de la disparidad racial y fue el mediador más potente.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por su diseño retrospectivo; falla en capturar a todos los mediadores significativos.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes negros, hispanos y otros con cáncer colorrectal experimentan retrasos en el tratamiento en comparación con los pacientes blancos. La igualación de los mediadores utilizados en este estudio podría reducir los retrasos en el tratamiento en un 20-43%, según el grupo racial / étnico. Las investigaciones futuras deberían identificar otras causas de disparidades raciales en el retraso del tratamiento e intervenir sobre ellas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B871 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Outcomes of clostridioides difficile infection on inflammatory bowel disease patients undergoing colonic resection: A propensity score weighted NSQIP analysis.

BACKGROUND: Inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients are at risk for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). The majority of published outcomes data feature medically treated patients. We aimed to analyze outcomes in a large cohort of surgical IBD patients diagnosed with CDI. METHODS: All patients with IBD in the ACS NSQIP Colectomy and Proctectomy (2015-2019) modules were identified. The IBD-CDI and IBD cohorts were propensity score weighted on demographic and surgical factors and compared. RESULTS: In the entire unmatched cohort (n = 12,782), 119/0.93% patients were diagnosed with CDI (74.2% Crohn's/25.7% UC/Indeterminate colitis) within 30-days of surgery. After propensity score weighting, IBD-CDI was associated with increased risk of readmission (OR 4.55 [3.09-6.71], p < 0.001), reoperation (3.17 [1.81-5.52], p < 0.001) and any complication (2.16 [1.47-3.17], p < 0.001). Any SSI (2.58 [1.67-3.98]), organ space SSI (2.49 [1.51-4.11], both p < 0.001), prolonged ventilation (4.03 [1.39-11.69],p = 0.01), acute renal failure (15.06 [4.26-53.26],p < 0.001), stroke (12.36 [1.26-121.06],p = 0.03), sepsis (2.4 [1.39-4.15],p = 0.002) and septic shock (3.29 [1.36-7.96],p = 0.008) were also higher in the IBD-CDI cohort. Mean length of stay was increased by 39% in CDI patients. CONCLUSION: Post colonic resection, IBD-CDI patients have worse outcomes than IBD patients without CDI. These patients represent a particularly vulnerable cohort who require close monitoring for the development of postoperative complications.

Defining diverticular fistula through inpatient admissions: a population study.

BACKGROUND: Diverticular fistula, a pathologic connection from the colon to the skin or another organ, is an uncommon sequela of diverticular disease. It is generally considered an indication for surgery. The current literature is limited in terms of defining the epidemiology of this disease process. This analysis defines the demographics of fistulous diverticular disease on a national level. METHODS: A retrospective review of the 2018 National Inpatient Sample (NIS) was conducted, using ICD-10 codes for diverticular disease, diverticular-associated fistulas, and associated surgeries. Demographic factors were compared between groups, and several sub-group analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 7,105,498 discharges were recorded: 119,115 (1.68%) with non-fistulizing diverticular disease and 3,843 (0.05%) with diverticular fistula. Patients with diverticular fistula were more likely to be younger (64.7 v 68.2 years, p < .0001) and female (57.3% v 55.4%, p = 0.028) than patients with non-fistulizing disease. They were also more likely to undergo surgery (64.9% v 25.7%, p < .0001), to be admitted electively (44.7% v 12.0%, p < .0001), and to have a longer length of stay (LOS) (mean 8.07 v 5.20 days, p < .0001). Diverticular fistula patients that underwent surgery were more likely to be male (44.8% v 39.0%, p = 0.003), to be admitted electively (65.3% v 6.7%, p < .0001), and to have longer LOS (mean 8.74 v 6.81 days, p < .0001) than those who received medical treatment alone. CONCLUSION: Diverticular fistula is a rare diagnosis, accounting for 0.05% of total admissions and 3.12% of admissions for diverticular disease. However, this is more common than the previously reported rate of < 0.1% of diverticular disease admissions. While surgery is generally indicated for diverticular fistula, only 64.9% of patients underwent surgical treatment. Although this study is limited by its retrospective nature and use of administrative data, our findings elucidate the prevalence and patterns of inpatient admissions for diverticular fistula in the United States.

Effect of Operative Time on Outcomes of Minimally Invasive Versus Open Pancreatoduodenectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate how operative time interacts with outcomes among different approaches to pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD). Minimally invasive PDs (MIPD), which include laparoscopic (LPD) and robotic (RPD) approaches, are increasingly performed in the USA. MIPD are generally associated with longer operative times (OT) compared to open PD (OPD). Increased OT is associated with inferior outcomes for OPD; however, the effect of OT on MIPD is not well understood. METHODS: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP)-targeted pancreatectomy dataset was utilized (2014-2019). Propensity score matching, logistic regression, and mixed effect modeling were performed to determine the effect of OT on outcomes following PD. OTs were stratified by quartiles for each approach, and outcomes were subsequently compared. RESULTS: Among 23,988 PDs, 22,185 were OPD and 1803 MIPD. Increased OT was associated with greater overall morbidity in all approaches. When comparing OT quartiles, MIPD was consistently associated with improved overall morbidity compared to OPD in matched cohorts. However, for upper quartiles, prolonged OT in MIPD was associated with significantly increased reoperation rates and mortality. The effect of OT on overall morbidity and other outcomes was comparable among LPD and RPD. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, increased OT was associated with incremental increases in overall morbidity after PD, irrespective of approach. While MIPD was associated with improved overall morbidity compared to OPD when stratified by OT quartile, higher mortality rates were observed with prolonged OT only with MIPD. Those data suggest that MIPD is a safe alternative to OPD when OT is optimized. NSQIP was used to compare the effect of operative time (OT) on outcomes following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), stratified by approach. Increased OT was associated with inferior outcomes following open, laparoscopic, and robotic PD. Surgeons should attempt to optimize OT, regardless of the approach to PD.

Variation in the volume-outcome relationship after rectal cancer surgery in the United States: Retrospective study with implications for regionalization.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated improved outcomes for patients with rectal cancer treated at higher-volume hospitals. However, little is known whether heterogeneity in this effect exists. The objective was to test whether the effect of increased annual rectal cancer resection volume on outcomes is consistent across all hospitals treating rectal cancer. METHODS: Adult stage I to III patients who underwent surgical resection for rectal adenocarcinoma from 2004 to 2016 were identified in the National Cancer Database. RESULTS: We included 120,522 patients treated at 763 hospitals in this retrospective cohort study. Higher volume was linearly and incrementally related to outcomes in unadjusted analyses. In adjusted models, for an average patient at the average hospital, the effect of increasing the annual caseload of rectal cancer resections by 20 resections per year was associated with 8%, (hazard ratio = 0.92, 95% confidence interval = 0.87, 0.97), 18% (odds ratio = 0.82, 95% confidence interval = 0.70, 0.98), and 16% (odds ratio = 0.84, 95% confidence interval = 0.73, 0.95) relative reductions in 5-year overall survival, 30-, and 90-day mortality, respectively, and with a 19% (odds ratio = 1.19, 95% confidence interval = 1.04, 1.36) relative increase in the rate of neoadjuvant chemoradiation. These effects varied by individual hospitals such that 39% of hospitals do not see any benefit in 5-year overall survival associated with higher volumes. Increased volume was associated with lower positive circumferential resection margin rates at 19% of the hospitals. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that higher-volume hospitals have improved outcomes after rectal cancer surgery. However, there exists significant variation in these effects induced by individual within-hospital effects. Regionalization policies may need to be flexible in identifying the hospitals that would achieve enhanced benefits from treating a larger volume of patients.

A New Bibliometric Index: The Top 100 Most Disruptive and Developmental Publications in Colorectal Surgery Journals.

BACKGROUND: A new bibliometric index called the disruption score was recently proposed to identify innovative and paradigm-changing publications. OBJECTIVE: The goal was to apply the disruption score to the colorectal surgery literature to provide the community with a repository of important research articles. DESIGN: This study is a bibliometric analysis. SETTINGS: The 100 most disruptive and developmental publications in Diseases of the Colon & Rectum, Colorectal Disease, International Journal of Colorectal Disease, and Techniques in Coloproctology were identified from a validated data set of disruption scores and linked with the iCite National Institutes of Health tool to obtain citation counts. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the disruption score and citation count. RESULTS: We identified 12,127 articles published in Diseases of the Colon & Rectum (n = 8109), International Journal of Colorectal Disease (n = 1912), Colorectal Disease (n = 1751), and Techniques in Coloproctology (n = 355) between 1954 and 2014. Diseases of the Colon & Rectum had the most articles in the top 100 most disruptive and developmental lists. The disruptive articles were in the top 1% of the disruption score distribution in PubMed and were cited between 1 and 671 times. Being highly cited was weakly correlated with high disruption scores (r = 0.09). Developmental articles had disruption scores that were more strongly correlated with citation count (r = 0.18). LIMITATIONS: This study is subject to the limitations of bibliometric indices, which change over time. DISCUSSION: The disruption score identified insightful and paradigm-changing studies in colorectal surgery. These studies include a wide range of topics and consistently identified editorials and case reports/case series as important research. This bibliometric analysis provides colorectal surgeons with a unique archive of research that can often be overlooked but that may have scholarly significance. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B639.UN NUEVO INDICE BIBLIOMÉTRICO: LAS 100 MAS IMPORTANTES PUBLICACIONES EN INNOVACIONES DESESTABILIZADORAS Y DE DESARROLLO EN LAS REVISTAS DE CIRUGÍA COLORRECTALANTECEDENTES:Un nuevo índice bibliométrico llamado innovación desestabilizadora y de desarrollo ha sido propuesto para identificar publicaciones de vanguardia y que pueden romper paradigmas.OBJETIVO:La meta fué aplicar el índice de desestabilización a la literature en cirugía colorectal para aportar a la comunidad con un acervo importante de artículos de investigación.DISEÑO:Un análisis bibliométrico.PARAMETROS:Las 100 publicaciones mas desestabilizadores y de desarrollo en las revistas: Diseases of the Colon and Rectum, Colorectal Disease, International Journal of Colorectal Disease, y Techniques in Coloproctology se recuperaron de una base de datos validada con puntuaciones de desestabilización y se ligaron con la herramienta iCite NIH para obtener la cuantificación de citas.PRINCIPAL MEDIDA DE RESULTADO:El índice desestabilizador y la cuantificación de citas.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron 12,127 articulos publicados en Diseases of the Colon and Rectum (n = 8,109), International Journal of Colorectal Disease (n = 1,912), Colorectal Disease (n = 1,751), y Techniques in Coloproctology (n = 355) de 1954-2014. Diseases of the Colon and Rectum representó la mayoría de las publicaciones dentro de la lista de los 100 mas desestabilizadores y de desarrollo. Esta literatura desestabilizadora se encuentra en el principal 1% de la distribución de la puntuacón desestabilizadora en PubMed y se citaron de 1 a 671 veces. El ser citado con frecuencia se relacionó vagamente con las puntuaciones de desastibilización (r = 0.09). Los artículos de desarrollo tuvieron puntuaciones de desestabilización que estuvieron muy correlacionados con la cuantificación de las citas (r = 0.18).LIMITACIONES:Las sujetas a las limitaciones de los índices bibliométricos, que se modifican en el tiempo.DISCUSION:La putuación de desestabilicación identificó trabajos perspicaces, pragmáticos y modificadores de paradigmas en cirugía colorrectal. Es de interés identificar que se incluyeron una gran variedad de temas y en forma consistente editoriales, reportes de casos y series de casos que representaron una investigación importante. Este análisis bibliométrico aporta a los cirujanos colorrectales de un acervo de investigación único que puede con frecuencia pasarse por alto, y sin embargo tener una gran importancia académica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B639. (Traducción- Dr. Miguel Esquivel-Herrera).

Keep Them on the Table: Outcomes Are Improved After Minimally Invasive Colectomy Despite Longer Operative Times in Patients With High-Risk Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: For high-risk patients, traditional surgical dogma advises open operations, with short operative times, to "get them off the table" instead of longer minimally invasive surgery approaches. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes in patients with high-risk colon cancer undergoing elective longer minimally invasive surgery operations compared with shorter open operations. DESIGN: Retrospective comparative cohort study. SETTINGS: Interventions were performed in hospitals participating in the national surgical database. PATIENTS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to identify patients with colon cancer with ASA class 3 to 4 undergoing right and sigmoid colectomy between 2012 and 2017. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Thirty-day postoperative outcomes were compared between short open and long minimally invasive groups. RESULTS: A total of 3775 patients were identified as having undergone long minimally invasive right colectomy and short open right colectomy (33% open, 67% minimally invasive surgery), and 1042 patients were identified as having undergone long minimally invasive sigmoid colectomy and short open sigmoid colectomy (36% open, 64% minimally invasive). Patients undergoing long minimally invasive right colectomy had significantly lower rates of overall morbidity, severe adverse events, mortality, superficial surgical site infections, and wound disruptions, as well as discharge to a higher level of care and shorter length of stay ( p < 0.05). Patients undergoing long minimally invasive sigmoid colectomy had decreased rates of overall morbidity, severe adverse events, and length of stay, as well as discharge to a higher level of care compared with the patients undergoing short open sigmoid colectomy ( p < 0.05). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the retrospective nature and standardized outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients undergoing colectomy for colon cancer, outcomes were worse with shorter open compared with longer minimally invasive surgery operations. Focus should shift from getting patients "off the table" faster to longer, but safer, minimally invasive surgery in high-risk patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B642 . MANTNGALOS SOBRE LA MESA HAY MEJORES RESULTADOS DESPUS DE COLECTOMA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA A PESAR DE TIEMPOS QUIRRGICOS MS PROLONGADOS EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE COLON DE ALTO RIESGO: ANTECEDENTES:Para los pacientes de alto riesgo, el dogma quirúrgico tradicional aconseja operaciones abiertas, con tiempos quirúrgicos cortos, con el fin de "sacarlos de la mesa" en lugar de enfoques quirúrgicos mínimamente invasivos más prolongados.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar los resultados posoperatorios en pacientes electivos de cáncer de colon de alto riesgo sometidos a operaciones de cirugía mínimamente invasiva más prolongadas en comparación con operaciones abiertas más cortas.DISEÑO:Los resultados posoperatorios de pacientes con cáncer de colon con clase 3-4 de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiología sometidos a colectomía derecha o sigmoidea se compararon en un análisis multivariado. Se comparó el grupo de colectomía derecha abierta corta (tiempo operatorio <116 minutos) y colectomía derecha mínimamente invasiva larga (tiempo operatorio> 132 minutos). También se compararon la colectomía sigmoidea abierta corta (tiempo operatorio <127 minutos) y la colectomía sigmoidea mínimamente invasiva larga (tiempo operatorio> 161 minutos).ESCENARIO:Las intervenciones se realizaron en hospitales participantes en la base de datos quirúrgica nacional.PACIENTES:La base de datos del Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica se utilizó para identificar a los pacientes con cáncer de colon con clase 3-4 de la Sociedad Americana de Anestesiología sometidos a colectomía derecha y sigmoidea entre 2012-2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se compararon los resultados posoperatorios a los treinta días entre el grupo de procedimientos abiertos cortos y el de mínimamente invasivos largos.RESULTADOS:Se identificó un total de 3.775 pacientes sometidos a colectomía derecha mínimamente invasiva larga y colectomía derecha abierta corta (33% abierta, 67% cirugía mínimamente invasiva) y se identificaron 1042 pacientes sometidos a colectomía sigmoidea mínimamente invasiva larga y colectomía sigmoidea abierta corta (36% abierta, 64% mínimamente invasiva). Los pacientes con colectomía derecha larga mínimamente invasiva tuvieron significativamente menor morbilidad general, eventos adversos graves, mortalidad, infecciones superficiales del sitio quirúrgico, dehiscencia de herida, alta a un nivel más alto de atención y estadía más corta ( p <0.05). Los pacientes con colectomía sigmoidea mínimamente invasiva prolongada tuvieron menor morbilidad general, eventos adversos graves, duración de la estadía y alta a un nivel más alto de atención en comparación con los pacientes con colectomía sigmoidea abierta corta ( p <0.05).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por la naturaleza retrospectiva y las medidas de resultado estandarizadas.CONCLUSIONES:En los pacientes de alto riesgo sometidos a colectomía por cáncer de colon, los resultados fueron peores con operaciones abiertas más cortas en comparación con operaciones mínimamente invasivas más largas. El enfoque debe pasar de hacer que los pacientes "salgan rápido de la mesa quirúrgica" a una cirugía mínimamente invasiva más prolongada pero más segura, en pacientes de alto riesgo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B642 . (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco ).

Minimally Invasive and Robotic Surgery for Ulcerative Colitis.

Significant advancements have been made over the last 30 years in the use of minimally invasive techniques for curative and restorative operations in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC). Numerous studies have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic and robotic approaches to subtotal colectomy (including in the urgent setting), total proctocolectomy, completion proctectomy, and pelvic pouch creation. Data show equivalent or improved short-term postoperative outcomes with minimally invasive techniques compared to open surgery, and equivalent or improved long-term bowel function, sexual function, and fertility. Overall, while minimally invasive techniques are safe and feasible for properly selected UC patients, surgeons must remember to abide by the principles of high-quality proctectomy and pouch creation and convert to open if necessary.

Diagnosis and Management of Chronic Anastomotic Leak.

Chronic anastomotic leaks present a daunting challenge to colorectal surgeons. Unfortunately, anastomotic leaks are common, and a significant number of leaks are diagnosed in a delayed fashion. The clinical presentation of these chronic leaks can be silent or have low grade, indolent symptoms. Operative options can be quite formidable and highly complex. Leaks are typically diagnosed by radiographic and endoscopic imaging during the preoperative assessment prior to defunctioning stoma reversal. The operative strategy depends on the location of the anastomosis and the specific features of the anastomotic dehiscence. Low colorectal anastomosis (i.e. following low anterior resection) may require a transanal approach, transabdominal approach, or a combination of the two. While restoration of bowel continuity is encouraged, it is not infrequent for a permanent ostomy to be required to maximize patient quality of life.