Nonoperative management protocol for locally advanced rectal cancer.

AIM: The standard treatment for low rectal cancer is preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery with low anterior resection with diverting ileostomy or abdominoperineal resection, both of which have significant long-term effects on bowel and sexual function. Due to the high morbidity of surgery, there has been increasing interest in nonoperative management for low rectal cancer. The aim of this work is to conduct a pan-Canadian Phase II trial assessing the safety of nonoperative management for low rectal cancer. METHOD: Patients with Stage II or III low rectal cancer completing chemoradiotherapy according to standard of care at participating centres will be assessed for complete clinical response 8-14 weeks following completion of chemoradiotherapy. Subjects achieving a clinical complete response will undergo active surveillance including endoscopy, imaging and bloodwork at regular intervals for 24 months. The primary outcome will be the rate of local regrowth 2 years after chemoradiotherapy. Nonoperative management will be considered safe (i.e. as effective as surgery to achieve local control) if the rate of local regrowth is ≤30% and surgical salvage is possible for all local regrowths. Secondary outcomes will include disease-free and overall survival. CONCLUSION: The results will be highly clinically relevant, as it is expected that nonoperative management will be safe and lead to widespread adoption of nonoperative management in Canada. This change in practice has the potential to decrease the number of patients requiring surgery and the costs associated with surgery and long-term surgical morbidity.

A survey of preoperative surgical nutrition practices, opinions, and barriers across Canada.

Malnutrition is prevalent among surgical candidates and associated with adverse outcomes. Despite being potentially modifiable, malnutrition risk screening is not a standard preoperative practice. We conducted a cross-sectional survey to understand healthcare professionals' (HCPs) opinions and barriers regarding screening and treatment of malnutrition. HCPs working with adult surgical patients in Canada were invited to complete an online survey. Barriers to preoperative malnutrition screening were assessed using the Capability Opportunity Motivation-Behaviour model. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and qualitative data were analyzed using summative content analysis. Of the 225 HCPs surveyed (n = 111 dietitians, n = 72 physicians, n = 42 allied HCPs), 96%-100% agreed that preoperative malnutrition is a modifiable risk factor associated with worse surgical outcomes and is a treatment priority. Yet, 65% (n = 142/220; dietitians: 88% vs. physicians: 40%) reported screening for malnutrition, which mostly occured in the postoperative period (n = 117) by dietitians (n = 94). Just 42% (48/113) of non-dietitian respondents referred positively screened patients to a dietitian for further assessment and treatment. The most prevalent barriers for malnutrition screening were related to opportunity, including availability of resources (57%, n = 121/212), time (40%, n = 84/212) and support from others (38%, n = 80/212). In conclusion, there is a gap between opinion and practice among surgical HCPs pertaining to malnutrition. Although HCPs agreed malnutrition is a surgical priority, the opportunity to screen for nutrition risk was a great barrier.

Predictors of pre- and post-treatment bowel dysfunction severity in patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of rectal cancer is frequently associated with low anterior resection syndrome. However, data concerning the contribution rectal tumors have on pretreatment bowel-dysfunction is scarce. We sought to evaluate the impact of the untreated rectal cancer on bowel-dysfunction and the relationship of pretreatment and post-treatment function. METHODS: A prospective database of adults with rectal cancer at a single university-affiliated colorectal referral center from August 2018 to March 2022 was queried. Bowel-dysfunction was measured using the low anterior resection syndrome score questionnaire (categorized as no, minor, or major low anterior resection syndrome) which was provided to patients at their primary visit, and after treatment. Patients were included if they underwent rectal cancer treatment and had pre- and post-treatment low anterior resection syndrome measurements. Observed low anterior resection syndrome scores were compared to normative low anterior resection syndrome data for age and sex-specific distributions from published data. Multiple multinomial regression compared pre- and post-treatment low anterior resection syndrome scores. RESULTS: Overall, 121 patients were included with mean age 62.0 years (standard deviation 12.3), 74% male, and mean tumor height 8.7 cm (standard deviation 5.72). The proportion of pretreatment observed low anterior resection syndrome were 48% no low anterior resection syndrome, 28% minor, and 24% major. Male and older patients were more likely to have worse than predicted low anterior resection syndrome categories (P < .05). On average, low anterior resection syndrome category did not change after treatment (P = .618) and pretreatment low anterior resection syndrome category was a significant independent predictor of post-treatment category (P = .037). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment bowel-dysfunction in rectal cancer patients is common and significantly worse than predicted for older and male patients. Importantly, pretreatment bowel-dysfunction predicted postoperative function. These results may better inform the shared decision-making process.

Does the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome Score Accurately Represent the Impact of Bowel Dysfunction on Health-Related Quality of Life?

BACKGROUND: Bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery is common, but its effect on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is complex. Objective measures of bowel function may not be a good representation on the actual impact on HRQOL. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine whether there are differences between patient-reported bowel-related impairment versus a standardized measure of bowel dysfunction on HRQOL. METHODS: A prospective database starting in September 2018 of adult patients who had undergone sphincter preserving rectal cancer surgery up to October 2021 was queried. Patients were excluded if they had local recurrence, metastasis, persistent stoma, or had less than 1-year follow-up. Patients were administered the study instruments at their standard surveillance visit: patient-reported bowel-related quality of life(BQOL) impairment, HRQOL using the Short Form-36 (SF-36), and bowel dysfunction using the low anterior resection syndrome(LARS) score. RESULTS: Overall, 136 patients were included. There were 43% with no LARS, 22% with minor LARS, and 35% with major LARS. For the BQOL, 26% of subjects reported no impairment, 57% minor impairment, and 17% major impairment. There was a high proportion of discordance between BQOL and LARS, with 23% minor or major LARS in patients with no BQOL impairment, and 32% with no or minor LARS with major BQOL impairment. The BQOL was associated with more changes in SF-36 scores compared to the LARS score. CONCLUSIONS: The patient-reported BQOL is likely to be a more relevant outcome of interest to patients than the objective LARS score. This has important implications for shared decision-making for rectal cancer treatments.

North American multicentre evaluation of a same-day discharge protocol for minimally invasive colorectal surgery using mHealth or telephone remote post-discharge monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Same-day discharge (SDD) after colectomy is feasible but requires effective post-discharge remote follow-up. Previous studies have used in-person home visits or a mobile health (mHealth) phone app, but the use of simple telephone calls for remote follow-up has not yet been studied. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare outcomes after SDD for minimally invasive colectomy using mHealth or telephone remote post-discharge follow-up. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was undertaken at two university-affiliated colorectal referral institutions from 02/2020 to 05/2021. Adult patients without significant comorbidities undergoing elective minimally invasive colectomy. Patients were discharged on the day of surgery based on set criteria. Post-discharge remote follow-up was performed using a mHealth app at site 1 and scheduled telephone calls at site 2 up to postoperative day (POD) 7. The main outcome for this study was the success rate of SDD, defined as discharge on POD0 without emergency department (ED) visit or readmission within the first 3 days. RESULTS: A total of 105 patients were recruited (site 1, n = 70; site 2, n = 35). Overall, 75% of patients were discharged on POD0 (site 1 81% vs. site 2 63%, p = 0.038), of which only two patients required an ED visit within the first 3 days, leading to an overall success rate of 73% (site 1 80% vs. site 2 60%, p = 0.029). The incidence of 30-day complications (16% vs. 20%, p = 0.583), ED visits (11% vs. 11%, p = 1.00), and readmissions (9% vs. 14%, p = 0.367) were similar between the two sites. There was only one patient at each study site that went to the ED without instructions through remote follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: A high proportion of patients planned for SDD were discharged on POD0 with few patients requiring an early unplanned ED visit. These results were similar with an mHealth app or telephone calls for post-discharge remote follow-ups, suggesting that SDD is feasible regardless of the method of post-discharge remote follow-up.

Tolerating clear fluids diet on postoperative day 0 predicts early recovery of gastrointestinal function after laparoscopic colectomy.

INTRODUCTION: A high proportion of colorectal surgery patients within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) do not experience complications but remain hospitalized mainly waiting for gastrointestinal (GI) recovery. Accurate identification of these patients may allow discharge prior to the return of GI function. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine if tolerating clear fluid (CF) on postoperative day (POD) 0 was associated with uncomplicated return of GI function after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Pooled data from three prospective studies from a single specialist colorectal referral center were analyzed (2013-2019). The present study included adult patients that underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy without stoma. Postoperative GI symptoms were collected daily in all three datasets. The main exposure variable, whether CF diet was tolerated on POD0, was defined as patients drinking at least 300 mL of CF without any nausea, anti-emetics, or vomiting (CF+ vs CF-). The main outcome measure was time to GI-3 (tolerating solid diet and passage of gas or stools). RESULTS: A total of 221 patients were included in this study, including 69% CF+ and 31% CF-. The groups were similar in age, gender, and comorbidities, but the CF- patients were more likely to have surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. CF+ patients had faster time to GI-3 (mean 1.6d (SD 0.7) vs. 2.3d (SD 1.5), p < 0.001). The CF+ group also experienced fewer complications (19% vs. 35%, p = 0.009), shorter mean LOS (mean 3.6d (SD 2.9) vs. 6.2d (SD 9.4), p = 0.002), and were more likely to be discharged by the target LOS (66% vs. 50%, p = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Toleration of CF on POD0 was associated with faster return of GI function, fewer complications, and shorter LOS. This may be used as a criteria for potential discharge prior to full return of GI function after laparoscopic colectomy within an ERP.

Trajectory of gastrointestinal function after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway.

BACKGROUND: Early identification of colorectal surgery patients predicted to have uneventful gastrointestinal recovery may allow for early discharge. Our objective was to identify trajectories of gastrointestinal recovery within a colorectal surgery enhanced recovery pathway. METHODS: Data from 2 prospective studies enrolling adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection at a specialist colorectal referral center were analyzed (2013-2019). All patients were managed according to a mature enhanced recovery pathway with a 3-day target length of stay. Postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms were collected daily and expressed using the validated I-FEED score. Latent-class growth curve (trajectory) analysis was used to identify different I-FEED trajectories over the first 3 postoperative days. RESULTS: A total of 192 patients were analyzed. Trajectory analysis identified 3 distinct trajectories: trajectory 1 had no gastrointestinal symptoms (41%); trajectory 2 had mild early symptoms with improvement over time (48%); and trajectory 3 had gastrointestinal symptoms that significantly worsened between postoperative days 1 and 2 (11%). I-FEED score ≤1 on postoperative day 1 predicted trajectory 1. Trajectory 1 had the best clinical outcomes, whereas trajectory 3 had the worst. CONCLUSION: I-FEED trajectory over postoperative days 1-3 was associated with clinical outcomes and may be used to predict gastrointestinal recovery. Findings from this study may inform clinical decision making regarding early hospital discharge within colorectal enhanced recovery pathways.

Reasons for delay in timely administration of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage III colon cancer: a multicentre cohort study from the McGill University Department of Oncology.

PURPOSE: Adjuvant chemotherapy within 56 or 84 days following curative resection is globally accepted as the standard of care for stage III colon cancer as it has been associated with improved overall survival. Initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy within this time frame is therefore recommended by clinical practice guidelines, including the European Society for Medical Oncology. The objective of this study was to evaluate adherence to these clinical practice guidelines for patients with stage III colon cancer across the Rossy Cancer Network (RCN); a partnership of McGill University's Faculty of Medicine, McGill University Health Centre, Jewish General Hospital and St Mary's Hospital Center. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 187 patients who had been diagnosed with stage III colon cancer and received adjuvant chemotherapy within the RCN partner hospitals from 2012 to 2015 were included. Patient and treatment information was retrospectively determined by chart review. Χ2 and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used to measure associations and a multivariate Cox regression model was used to determine risk factors contributing to delays in administration of adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: The median turnaround time between surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy was 69 days. Importantly, only 27% of patients met the 56-day target, and 71% met the 84-day target. Increasing age, having more than one surgical complication and being diagnosed between 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 reduced the likelihood that patients met these targets. Furthermore, delays were observed at most intervals from surgery to first adjuvant chemotherapy treatment. CONCLUSION: Our study found that within these academic hospital settings, 27% of patients met the 56-day target, and 71% met the 84-day target. Delays were associated with hospital, surgeon and patient-related factors. Initiatives in quality improvement are needed in order to improve adherence to recommended treatment guidelines for prompt administration of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer.

Quality indicator selection for the Canadian Partnership against Cancer rectal cancer project: A modified Delphi study.

AIM: It is well established that (i) magnetic resonance imaging, (ii) multidisciplinary cancer conference (MCCs), (iii) preoperative radiotherapy, (iv) total mesorectal excision surgery and (v) pathological assessment as described by Quirke are key processes necessary for high quality, rectal cancer care. The objective was to select a set of multidisciplinary quality indicators to measure the uptake of these clinical processes in clinical practice. METHOD: A multidisciplinary panel was convened and a modified two-phase Delphi method was used to select a set of quality indicators. Phase 1 included a literature review with written feedback from the panel. Phase 2 included an in-person workshop with anonymous voting. The selection criteria for the indicators were strength of evidence, ease of capture and usability. Indicators for which ≥90% of the panel members voted 'to keep' were selected as the final set of indicators. RESULTS: During phase 1, 68 potential indicators were generated from the literature and an additional four indicators were recommended by the panel. During phase 2, these 72 indicators were discussed; 48 indicators met the 90% inclusion threshold and included eight pathology, five radiology, 11 surgical, six radiation oncology and 18 MCC indicators. CONCLUSION: A modified Delphi method was used to select 48 multidisciplinary quality indicators to specifically measure the uptake of key processes necessary for high quality care of patients with rectal cancer. These quality indicators will be used in future work to identify and address gaps in care in the uptake of these clinical processes.

Patients' preferences for sphincter preservation versus abdominoperineal resection for low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for low rectal cancer can be associated with severe bowel dysfunction and impaired quality of life. It is important to determine how patients value the trade-off between anorectal dysfunction versus abdominoperineal resection. Therefore, the objective was to determine patients' preferences for treatment for low rectal cancer. METHODS: Ambulatory patients without colorectal cancer at a single high-volume academic colorectal referral center from September 2019 to March 2020 were included. Patients with prior stoma or malignancy were excluded. Participants were presented with a hypothetic scenario describing a low rectal cancer. A threshold task identified preferences for functional and oncologic outcomes for sphincter preservation versus abdominoperineal resection. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were recruited. Patients preferred abdominoperineal resection over sphincter preservation if there were more than a mean of 6.7 (standard deviation 4.0) daily bowel movements, 1.9 (standard deviation 2.6) daily episodes of stool incontinence, and 6.5 (standard deviation 3.2) gas incontinence. Abdominoperineal resection was preferred over sphincter preservation in 38% if daily activities were altered owing to fecal urgency. Patients were willing to accept a 10% (interquartile range, 5-25) absolute increase in risk of margin involvement with sphincter preservation to avoid abdominoperineal resection. Abdominoperineal resection was the preferred option overall for 18% of patients. CONCLUSION: An important proportion of patients would prefer abdominoperineal resection over sphincter preservation owing to the impairments in anorectal function associated with sphincter preservation. The decision to perform sphincter preservation or abdominoperineal resection should consider how the patients' value functional outcomes with a low anastomosis.

Effect of Multimodal Prehabilitation vs Postoperative Rehabilitation on 30-Day Postoperative Complications for Frail Patients Undergoing Resection of Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Research supports use of prehabilitation to optimize physical status before and after colorectal cancer resection, but its effect on postoperative complications remains unclear. Frail patients are a target for prehabilitation interventions owing to increased risk for poor postoperative outcomes. Objective: To assess the extent to which a prehabilitation program affects 30-day postoperative complications in frail patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection compared with postoperative rehabilitation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This single-blind, parallel-arm, superiority randomized clinical trial recruited patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection from September 7, 2015, through June 19, 2019. Patients were followed up for 4 weeks before surgery and 4 weeks after surgery at 2 university-affiliated tertiary hospitals. A total of 418 patients 65 years or older were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 298 patients were excluded (not frail [n = 290], unable to exercise [n = 3], and planned neoadjuvant treatment [n = 5]), and 120 frail patients (Fried Frailty Index,≥2) were randomized. Ten patients were excluded after randomization because they refused surgery (n = 3), died before surgery (n = 3), had no cancer (n = 1), had surgery without bowel resection (n = 1), or were switched to palliative care (n = 2). Hence, 110 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (55 in the prehabilitation [Prehab] and 55 in the rehabilitation [Rehab] groups). Data were analyzed from July 25 through August 21, 2019. Interventions: Multimodal program involving exercise, nutritional, and psychological interventions initiated before (Prehab group) or after (Rehab group) surgery. All patients were treated within a standardized enhanced recovery pathway. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome included the Comprehensive Complications Index measured at 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes were 30-day overall and severe complications, primary and total length of hospital stay, 30-day emergency department visits and hospital readmissions, recovery of walking capacity, and patient-reported outcome measures. Results: Of 110 patients randomized, mean (SD) age was 78 (7) years; 52 (47.3%) were men and 58 (52.7%) were women; 31 (28.2%) had rectal cancer; and 87 (79.1%) underwent minimally invasive surgery. There was no between-group difference in the primary outcome measure, 30-day Comprehensive Complications Index (adjusted mean difference, -3.2; 95% CI, -11.8 to 5.3; P = .45). Secondary outcome measures were also not different between groups. Conclusions and Relevance: In frail patients undergoing colorectal cancer resection (predominantly minimally invasive) within an enhanced recovery pathway, a multimodal prehabilitation program did not affect postoperative outcomes. Alternative strategies should be considered to optimize treatment of frail patients preoperatively. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02502760.

Prehabilitation: finally utilizing frailty screening data.

The elderly colorectal cancer patients tend to be frail, at nutrition risk with multiple comorbidities. In view of the stress on the body by surgery and recovery, it makes sense if patients are prepared before appropriately so that they can recover earlier and better. Prehabilitation prior to major surgery has attracted the attention of clinicians recently, and this review highlights the steps that need to be taken to implement a multidisciplinary program. Such programs requires a paradigm shift in the sense that all players need to be working in team for the benefit of patinets' outcome.

A mobile device application (app) to improve adherence to an enhanced recovery program for colorectal surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased adherence with enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) is associated with improved outcomes. However, adherence to postoperative elements that rely on patient participation remains suboptimal. Mobile device apps may improve delivery of health education material and have the potential to foster behavior change and improve patient compliance. The objective of this study was to estimate the extent to which a novel mobile device app affects adherence to an ERP for colorectal surgery in comparison to standard written education. METHODS: This was a superiority, parallel-group, assessor-blind, sham-controlled randomized trial involving 97 patients undergoing colorectal resection. Participants were randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio into one of two groups: (1) iPad including a novel mobile device app for postoperative education and self-assessment of recovery, or (2) iPad without the app. The primary outcome measure was mean adherence (%) to a bundle of five postoperative ERP elements requiring patient participation: mobilization, gastrointestinal motility stimulation, breathing exercises, and consumption of oral liquids and nutritional drinks. RESULTS: In the intervention group, app usage was high (94% completed surveys on POD0, 82% on POD1, 72% on POD2). Mean overall adherence to the bundle on the two first postoperative days was similar between groups: 59% (95% CI 52-66%) in the intervention group and 62% (95% CI 56-68%) in the control group [Adjusted mean difference 2.4% (95% CI - 5 to 10%) p = 0.53]. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, access to a mobile health application did not improve adherence to a well-established enhanced recovery pathway in colorectal surgery patients, when compared to standard written patient education. Future research should evaluate the impact of applications integrating novel behavioral change techniques, particularly in contexts where adherence is low.

Safety and Feasibility of Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging Criteria to Identify Patients With "Good Prognosis" Rectal Cancer Eligible for Primary Surgery: The Phase 2 Nonrandomized QuickSilver Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Chemoradiotherapy (CRT), followed by surgery, is the recommended approach for stage II and III rectal cancer. While CRT decreases the risk of local recurrence, it does not improve survival and leads to poorer functional outcomes than surgery alone. Therefore, new approaches to better select patients for CRT are important. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a phase 2 study to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) criteria to select patients with "good prognosis" rectal tumors for primary surgery. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Prospective nonrandomized phase 2 study at 12 high-volume colorectal surgery centers across Canada. From September 30, 2014, to October 21, 2016, a total of 82 patients were recruited for the study. Participants were patients newly diagnosed as having rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis rectal cancer. The MRI criteria for good prognosis tumors included distance to the mesorectal fascia greater than 1 mm; definite T2, T2/early T3, or definite T3 with less than 5 mm of extramural depth of invasion; and absent or equivocal extramural venous invasion. INTERVENTIONS: Patients with rectal cancer with MRI-predicted good prognosis tumors underwent primary surgery. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) rate. Assuming a 10% baseline probability of a positive CRM, a sample size of 75 was estimated to yield a 95% CI of ±6.7%. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients (74% male) participated in the study. The median age at the time of surgery was 66 years (range, 37-89 years). Based on MRI, most tumors were midrectal (65% [n = 53]), T2/early T3 (60% [n = 49]), with no suspicious lymph nodes (63% [n = 52]). On final pathology, 91% (n = 75) of tumors were T2 or greater, 29% (n = 24) were node positive, and 59% (n = 48) were stage II or III. The positive CRM rate was 4 of 82 (4.9%; 95% CI, 0.2%-9.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The use of MRI criteria to select patients with good prognosis rectal cancer for primary surgery results in a low rate of positive CRM and suggests that CRT may not be necessary for all patients with stage II and III rectal cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN.com identifier: ISRCTN05107772.

Clinical and Economic Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Pathway for Open and Laparoscopic Rectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The short-term benefits of laparoscopy for rectal surgery are equivocal. The objective of this study was to determine the clinical and economic impact of an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) for laparoscopic and open rectal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent elective rectal resection with primary anastomosis between January 2009 and March 2012 at two tertiary-care, university-affiliated institutions were identified. Patients who met inclusion criteria were divided into four groups, according to surgical approach (laparoscopic [lap] or open) and perioperative management (ERP or conventional care [CC]). Length of stay (LOS), postoperative complications, and hospital costs were compared. RESULTS: A total of 381 patients were included in the analysis (201 open-CC, 34 lap-CC, 38 open-ERP, and 108 lap-ERP). Patients were mostly similar at baseline. ERPs significantly reduced median LOS after both open cases (open-CC 10 days versus open-ERP 7.5 days, P = .003) and laparoscopic cases (lap-CC 5 days versus lap-ERP 4.5 days, P = .046). ERPs also reduced variability in LOS compared with CC. There was no difference in postoperative complications with the use of ERPs (open-CC 51% versus open-ERP 50%, P = .419; lap-CC 32% versus lap-ERP 36%, P = .689). On multivariate analysis, both ERP (-3.6 days [95% confidence interval, CI -6.0 to -1.3]) and laparoscopy (-3.6 days [95% CI -5.9 to -1.0]) were independently associated with decreased LOS. Overall costs were only lower when lap-ERP was compared with open-CC (mean difference -2420 CAN$ [95% CI -5628 to -786]). CONCLUSIONS: ERPs reduced LOS after rectal resections, and the combination of laparoscopy and ERPs significantly reduced overall costs compared to when neither strategy was used.

Predictors of adherence to enhanced recovery pathway elements after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) include a bundle of evidence-based preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative interventions that together reduce morbidity and length of stay after colorectal surgery. Increased adherence with the bundle is associated with better postoperative outcomes, but adherence is lowest in the postoperative period. Identifying risk factors for lower adherence may help design quality improvement strategies. The aim of this study was to estimate the extent to which patient, procedural, and organizational factors predict adherence to postoperative ERP elements in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: Patients in an institutional ERP registry undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery between 2012 and 2014 were analyzed. The ERP included 10 postoperative ERP elements classified into 2 groups: those requiring patient participation (PP, 5 elements, including nutritional intake and mobilization) and those provided by the clinical team (CT, 5 elements, including removal of catheters and type of analgesia). The impact of baseline and intraoperative factors on adherence was estimated using stepwise linear regression. RESULTS: A total of 223 patients were included (mean age 60, 48% male). Mean adherence was 79% to the PP bundle (range 65-93% for individual elements), and 82% for the CT bundle (range 68-98% for individual elements). The occurrence of nausea/vomiting in the first 24 h was associated with lower adherence to both bundles. In the PP bundle, patients who arrived at the ward after 6 p.m. had lower adherence. In the CT bundle, patients who had rectal resection had lower adherence while thoracic epidural was associated with higher adherence. CONCLUSIONS: With the exception of postoperative nausea and vomiting, predictors of adherence to ERP elements after colorectal surgery differed for elements requiring patient participation and those provided by the clinical team. Strategies to improve ERP adherence should target staff education and engagement of patients at risk for lower adherence.

Incisional Hernia After Midline Versus Transverse Specimen Extraction Incision: A Randomized Trial in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Colectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of incisional hernia (IH) between midline and transverse specimen extraction site in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy. BACKGROUND: Midline specimen extraction incision is most commonly used in laparoscopic colectomy, but has high IH risk. IH may be lower for transverse incision. METHODS: A single-center superiority trial was conducted. Eligible patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy were randomly assigned to midline or transverse specimen extraction. Primary outcome was IH incidence at 1 year. Power calculation required 76 patients per group to detect a reduction in IH from 20% to 5%. Secondary outcomes included perioperative outcomes, pain scores, health-related quality of life (SF-36), and cosmesis (Body Image Questionnaire). RESULTS: A total of 165 patients were randomly assigned to transverse (n = 79) or midline (n = 86) specimen extraction site, of which 141 completed 1-year follow-up (68 transverse, 73 midline). Patient, tumor, surgical data, and perioperative morbidity were similar. Pain scores were similar on each postoperative day. On intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference in the incidence of IH at 1 year (transverse 2% vs midline 8%, P = 0.065) or after mean 30.3 month (standard deviation 9.4) follow-up (6% vs 14%, P = 0.121). On per-protocol analysis there were more IH after midline incision with longer follow-up (15% vs 2%, P = 0.013). On intention-to-treat analysis, SF-36 domains body pain and social functioning were improved after transverse incision. Cosmesis was higher after midline incision on per-protocol analysis, but without affecting body image. CONCLUSIONS: Per-protocol analysis of this trial demonstrates that a transverse specimen extraction site has a lower incidence of IH compared to midline with longer follow-up but has worse cosmesis.

Goal-directed Fluid Therapy Does Not Reduce Primary Postoperative Ileus after Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate perioperative fluid therapy impairs gastrointestinal function. Studies primarily evaluating the impact of goal-directed fluid therapy on primary postoperative ileus are missing. The objective of this study was to determine whether goal-directed fluid therapy reduces the incidence of primary postoperative ileus after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. METHODS: Randomized patient and assessor-blind controlled trial conducted in adult patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Patients were assigned randomly to receive intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (goal-directed fluid therapy group) or fluid therapy based on traditional principles (control group). Primary postoperative ileus was the primary outcome. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight patients were included and analyzed (goal-directed fluid therapy group: n = 64; control group: n = 64). The incidence of primary postoperative ileus was 22% in the goal-directed fluid therapy and 22% in the control group (relative risk, 1; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.9; P = 1.00). Intraoperatively, patients in the goal-directed fluid therapy group received less intravenous fluids (mainly less crystalloids) but a greater volume of colloids. The increase of stroke volume and cardiac output was more pronounced and sustained in the goal-directed fluid therapy group. Length of hospital stay, 30-day postoperative morbidity, and mortality were not different. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy compared with fluid therapy based on traditional principles does not reduce primary postoperative ileus in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the context of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Its previously demonstrated benefits might have been offset by advancements in perioperative care.

Incidence of incisional hernia in the specimen extraction site for laparoscopic colorectal surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of incisional hernia(IH) may be affected by the choice of specimen extraction incision. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing the incidence of IH after midline and off-midline incisions in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. METHODS: A systematic search was performed according to PRISMA guidelines to identify all comparative studies from January 1991-August 2016 on the incidence of IH after midline and off-midline(transverse or Pfannenstiel) incisions in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Case series and studies reporting the IH after stoma site extraction, SILS, or NOTES were excluded. The MINORS instrument was used for quality assessment for observational studies. Weighted estimates were calculated using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 17 articles were identified and included for meta-analysis, 16 of which were observational studies and 1 was an RCT. The mean MINORS score for observational studies was 12.9 (SD 3.2, range 7-17). Sample sizes in the midline (mean 185, range 20-995) and off-midline(mean 184, range 20-903) groups were similar. Follow-up ranged from 17.3 to 42 months. The pooled incidence of IH was 10.6% (338/3177) in midline, 3.7% (48/1314) in transverse, and 0.9% (9/956) in Pfannenstiel incisions. IH was significantly higher in the midline compared to off-midline groups (weighted OR 4.1, 95% CI 2.0-8.3, I 2 = 79.7%, p for heterogeneity <0.001). Midline incisions were also at higher risk of IH versus transverse (weighted OR 3.0, 95% CI 1.4-6.7, I 2 = 72.7%, p for heterogeneity <0.001) and Pfannenstiel (weighted OR 8.6, 95% CI 3.0-24.6, I 2 = 43.5%, p for heterogeneity = 0.101) incisions. There was no publication bias according the funnel plot or statistically (Egger's p = 0.336). CONCLUSIONS: Midline incisions for specimen extraction in laparoscopic colorectal surgery are at significantly higher risk of IH compared to off-midline (transverse or Pfannenstiel) incisions, but these data are of poor quality and heterogeneous.