Quality and Outcome Assessment for Surgery.

ABSTRACT: This forum summarizes the proceedings of the joint European Surgical Association (ESA)/American Surgical Association (ASA) symposium on Quality and Outcome Assessment for Surgery that took place in Bordeaux, France, as part of the celebrations of the 30th anniversary of the ESA. Three presentations focused on a) the main messages from the Outcome4Medicine Consensus Conference, which took place in Zurich, Switzerland, in June 2022, b) the patient perspective, and c) benchmarking were hold by ESA members and discussed by ASA members in a symposium attended by members of both associations.

Feasibility of Prospectively Comparing Opioid Analgesia With Opioid-Free Analgesia After Outpatient General Surgery: A Pilot Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The overprescription of opioids to surgical patients is recognized as an important factor contributing to the opioid crisis. However, the value of prescribing opioid analgesia (OA) vs opioid-free analgesia (OFA) after postoperative discharge remains uncertain. Objective: To investigate the feasibility of conducting a full-scale randomized clinical trial (RCT) to assess the comparative effectiveness of OA vs OFA after outpatient general surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This parallel, 2-group, assessor-blind, pragmatic pilot RCT was conducted from January 29 to September 3, 2020 (last follow-up on October 2, 2020). at 2 university-affiliated hospitals in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Participants were adult patients (aged ≥18 years) undergoing outpatient abdominal (ie, cholecystectomy, appendectomy, or hernia repair) or breast (ie, partial or total mastectomy) general surgical procedures. Exclusion criteria were contraindications to drugs used in the trial, preoperative opioid use, conditions that could affect assessment of outcomes, and intraoperative or early complications requiring hospitalization. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive OA (around-the-clock nonopioids and opioids for breakthrough pain) or OFA (around-the-clock nonopioids with increasing doses and/or addition of nonopioid medications for breakthrough pain) after postoperative discharge. Main Outcomes and Measures: Main outcomes were a priori RCT feasibility criteria (ie, rates of surgeon agreement, patient eligibility, patient consent, treatment adherence, loss to follow-up, and missing follow-up data). Secondary outcomes included pain intensity and interference, analgesic intake, 30-day unplanned health care use, and adverse events. Between-group comparison of outcomes followed the intention-to-treat principle. Results: A total of 15 surgeons were approached; all (100%; 95% CI, 78%-100%) agreed to have patients recruited and adhered to the study procedures. Rates of patient eligibility and consent were 73% (95% CI, 66%-78%) and 57% (95% CI, 49%-65%), respectively. Seventy-six patients were randomized (39 [51%] to OA and 37 [49%] to OFA) and included in the intention-to-treat analysis (mean [SD] age, 55.5 [14.5] years; 50 [66%] female); 40 (53%) underwent abdominal surgery, and 36 (47%) underwent breast surgery. Seventy-five patients (99%; 95% CI, 93%-100%) adhered to the allocated treatment; 1 patient randomly assigned to OFA received an opioid prescription. Seventeen patients (44%) randomly assigned to OA consumed opioids after discharge. Seventy-three patients (96%; 95% CI, 89%-99%) completed the 30-day follow-up. The rate of missing questionnaires was 37 of 3724 (1%; 95% CI, 0.7%-1.4%). All the a priori RCT feasibility criteria were fulfilled. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this pilot RCT support the feasibility of conducting a robust, full-scale RCT to inform evidence-based prescribing of analgesia after outpatient general surgery. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04254679.

Toward a Consensus on Centralization in Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To critically assess centralization policies for highly specialized surgeries in Europe and North America and propose recommendations. BACKGROUND/METHODS: Most countries are increasingly forced to maintain quality medicine at a reasonable cost. An all-inclusive perspective, including health care providers, payers, society as a whole and patients, has ubiquitously failed, arguably for different reasons in environments. This special article follows 3 aims: first, analyze health care policies for centralization in different countries, second, analyze how centralization strategies affect patient outcome and other aspects such as medical education and cost, and third, propose recommendations for centralization, which could apply across continents. RESULTS: Conflicting interests have led many countries to compromise for a health care system based on factors beyond best patient-oriented care. Centralization has been a common strategy, but modalities vary greatly among countries with no consensus on the minimal requirement for the number of procedures per center or per surgeon. Most national policies are either partially or not implemented. Data overwhelmingly indicate that concentration of complex care or procedures in specialized centers have positive impacts on quality of care and cost. Countries requiring lower threshold numbers for centralization, however, may cause inappropriate expansion of indications, as hospitals struggle to fulfill the criteria. Centralization requires adjustments in training and credentialing of general and specialized surgeons, and patient education. CONCLUSION/RECOMMENDATIONS: There is an obvious need in most areas for effective centralization. Unrestrained, purely "market driven" approaches are deleterious to patients and society. Centralization should not be based solely on minimal number of procedures, but rather on the multidisciplinary treatment of complex diseases including well-trained specialists available around the clock. Audited prospective database with monitoring of quality of care and cost are mandatory.

Stenting in Malignant Biliary Obstruction.

Decompression of the biliary system in patients with malignant biliary obstruction has been widely accepted and implemented as part of the care. Despite a wealth of literature, there remains a significant amount of uncertainty as to which approach would be most appropriate in different clinical settings. This review covers stenting of the biliary system in cases of resectable or palliative malignant biliary obstruction, potential candidates for biliary drainage, technical aspects of the procedure, as well as management of biliary stent dysfunction. Furthermore, periprocedural considerations including proper mapping of the location of obstruction and the use of antibiotics are addressed.

Comparison Costs of ERCP and MRCP in Patients with Suspected Biliary Obstruction Based on a Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with suspected biliary obstruction remains unclear, and includes the possible performance of magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). OBJECTIVES: To complete a cost analysis based on a medical effectiveness randomized trial comparing an ERCP-first approach with an MRCP-first approach in patients with suspected bile duct obstruction. METHODS: The management strategies were based on a medical effectiveness trial of 257 patients over a 12-month follow-up period. Direct and indirect costs were included, adopting a societal perspective. The cost values are expressed in 2012 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Total per-patient direct costs were Can$3547 for ERCP-first patients and Can$4013 for MRCP-first patients. Corresponding indirect costs were Can$732 and Can$694, respectively. Causes for differences in direct costs included a more frequent second procedure and a greater mean number of hospital days over the year in patients of the MRCP-first group. In contrast, it is the ERCP-first patients whose indirect costs were greater, principally due to more time away from activities of daily living. Choosing an ERCP-first strategy rather than an MRCP-first strategy saved on average Can$428 per patient over the 12-month follow-up duration; however, there existed a large amount of overlap when varying total cost estimates across a sensitivity analysis range based on observed resources utilization. CONCLUSIONS: This cost analysis suggests only a small difference in total costs, favoring the ERCP-first group, and is principally attributable to procedures and hospitalizations with little impact from indirect cost measurements.

Expert Intraoperative Judgment and Decision-Making: Defining the Cognitive Competencies for Safe Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Bile duct injuries from laparoscopic cholecystectomy remain a significant source of morbidity and are often the result of intraoperative errors in perception, judgment, and decision-making. This qualitative study aimed to define and characterize higher-order cognitive competencies required to safely perform a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. STUDY DESIGN: Hierarchical and cognitive task analyses for establishing a critical view of safety during laparoscopic cholecystectomy were performed using qualitative methods to map the thoughts and practices that characterize expert performance. Experts with more than 5 years of experience, and who have performed at least 100 laparoscopic cholecystectomies, participated in semi-structured interviews and field observations. Verbal data were transcribed verbatim, supplemented with content from published literature, coded, thematically analyzed using grounded-theory by 2 independent reviewers, and synthesized into a list of items. RESULTS: A conceptual framework was created based on 10 interviews with experts, 9 procedures, and 18 literary sources. Experts included 6 minimally invasive surgeons, 2 hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgeons, and 2 acute care general surgeons (median years in practice, 11 [range 8 to 14]). One hundred eight cognitive elements (35 [32%] related to situation awareness, 47 [44%] involving decision-making, and 26 [24%] action-oriented subtasks) and 75 potential errors were identified and categorized into 6 general themes and 14 procedural tasks. Of the 75 potential errors, root causes were mapped to errors in situation awareness (24 [32%]), decision-making (49 [65%]), or either one (61 [81%]). CONCLUSIONS: This study defines the competencies that are essential to establishing a critical view of safety and avoiding bile duct injuries during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This framework may serve as the basis for instructional design, assessment tools, and quality-control metrics to prevent injuries and promote a culture of patient safety.

Hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery workforce in Canada.

This article characterizes the Canadian hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery workforce (demographics, practice patterns, career satisfaction, education and recruitment plans). This information will serve as a baseline for future national comparisons, allow informed workforce planning and facilitate mathematical modelling of the HPB workforce in Canada.

McGill Brisbane Symptom Score for patients with resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma.

AIM: To evaluate the ability of the McGill Brisbane Symptom Score (MBSS) to predict survival in resectable pancreatic head adenocarcinoma (PHA) patients. METHODS: All PHA patients (n = 83) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy at the McGill University Health Center, Quebec between 1/2001-1/2010 were evaluated. Data related to patient and cancer characteristics, MBSS variables, and treatment were collected; univariable and multivariable survival analyses were performed. We obtained complete follow-up until February 2011 in all patients through the database of the provincial health insurance plan of Quebec. The unique health insurance numbers of these patients were used to retrieve information from this database which captures all billable clinical encounters, and ensures 100% actual survival data. RESULTS: Median survival was 23 mo overall: 45 mo for patients with low MBSS, 17 mo for high MBSS (P = 0.005). At twelve months survival was 83.3% (95%CI: 66.6-92.1) vs 58.1% (95%CI: 42.1-71.2) in those with low vs high MBSS, and 24 mo survival was 63.8% (95%CI: 45.9-77.1) and 34.0% (95%CI: 20.2-48.2) respectively. In the multivariate Cox model (stratified by chemotherapy), after addition of clinically meaningful covariates, MBSS was the variable with the strongest association with survival (HR = 2.63; P = 0.001). Adjuvant chemotherapy interacted with MBSS category such that only high MBSS patients accrued a benefit. In univariate analysis we found a lower mortality in high MBSS but not low MBSS patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. This interaction variable, on Cox model, resulted in an adjusted mortality HR for the high MBSS (compared to low MBSS) of 4.14 (95%CI: 1.48-11.64) without chemotherapy and 2.11 (95%CI: 1.06-4.17) with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: The MBSS is a simple prognostic tool for resectable PHA. Preoperative categorization of patients according to the MBSS allows effective stratification of patients to guide therapy.

Recurrence of non-invasive intraductal papillary municious neoplasm seven years following total pancreatectomy.

INTRODUCTION: Intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm is an increasingly recognized disease with varying premalignant potential and unclear incidence, characterized by a mucin-producing epithelium and dilation of the pancreatic duct. PRESENTATION OF CASE: We present the first documented case of distant intestinal intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm recurrence following total pancreatectomy for side-branch non-invasive borderline malignant intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm. DISCUSSION: We review the current literature in order to try and answer important questions regarding our ability to predict intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm recurrence, our understanding of the potential for recurrence and what follow-up should be recommended to properly monitor recurrence after a benign, albeit borderline malignant, side-branch lesion resection. CONCLUSION: Our case report confirms that the low risk classification of an intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm lesion even after total pancreatectomy does not always predict recurrence and that definitive prognostic factors of recurrence in the setting of non-invasive disease have yet to be identified. A vigilant long-term approach to follow-up may thus be required even in low risk cases.

Hepatitis C infection and hepatocellular carcinoma in liver transplantation: a 20-year experience.

BACKGROUND: Hepatitis C infection (HCV) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the two main causes of liver transplantation (LT), have reduced survival post-LT. The impact of HCV, HCC and their coexistence on post-LT survival were assessed. METHODOLOGY: All 601 LT patients from 1992 to 2011 were reviewed. Those deceased within 30 days (n = 69) and re-transplants (n = 49) were excluded. Recipients were divided into four groups: (a) HCC-/HCV-(n = 252) (b) HCC+/HCV- (n = 58), (c) HCC-/HCV+ (n = 106) and (d) HCC+/HCV+ (n = 67). Demographics, the donor risk index (DRI), Model for End-Stage Liver Disease (MELD) score, survival, complications and tumour characteristics were collected. Statistical analysis included anova, chi-square, Fisher's exact tests and Cox and Kaplan-Meier for overall survival. RESULTS: Groups were comparable with regards to baseline characteristics, but HCC patients were older. After adjusting for age, MELD, gender and the donor risk index (DRI), survival was lower in the HCC+/HCV+ group (59.5% at 5 yrs) and the hazard ratio (HR) was 1.90 [95% confidence interval (CI),1.24-2.95, P = 0.003] and 1.45 (95% CI, 0.99-2.12, P = 0.054) for HCC-/HCV+. HCC survival was similar to controls (HR 1.18, 95% CI, 0.71-1.93, P = 0.508). HCC+/HCV- patients exceeded the Milan criteria (50% versus 31%, P < 0.04) and had more micro-vascular invasion (37.5% versus 20.6%, P = 0.042). HCC+/HCV+ versus HCC+/HCV- survival remained lower (HR 1.94, 95% CI, 1.06-3.81, P = 0.041) after correcting for tumour characteristics and treatment. CONCLUSION: HCV patients had lower survival post-LT. HCC alone had no impact on survival. Patient survival decreased in the HCC+/HCV+ group and this appears to be as a consequence of HCV recurrence.

Pancreatic cancer and predictors of survival: comparing the CA 19-9/bilirubin ratio with the McGill Brisbane Symptom Score.

INTRODUCTION: Few tools predict survival from pancreatic cancer (PAC). The McGill Brisbane Symptom Score (MBSS) based on symptoms at presentation (weight loss, pain, jaundice and smoking) was recently validated. The present study compares the ability of four strategies to predict 9-month survival: MBSS, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) alone, CA19-9-to-bilirubin ratio and a combination of MBSS and the CA19-9-to-bilirubin ratio. METHODOLOGY: A retrospective review of 133 patients diagnosed with PAC between 2005 and 2011 was performed. Survival was determined from the Quebec civil registry. Blood CA 19-9 and bilirubin values were collected (n = 52) at the time of diagnosis. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine a cutoff for optimal test characteristics of CA 19-9 and CA19-9-to-total bilirubin ratio in predicting survival at 9 months. Predictive characteristics were then calculated for the four strategies. RESULTS: Of the four strategies, the one with the greatest negative predictive value was the MBSS: negative predictive value (NPV) was 90.2% (76.9-97.3%) and the positive likelihood ratio (LR) was the greatest. The ability of CA 19-9 levels alone, at baseline, to predict survival was low. For the CA19-9-to-bilirubin ratio, the test characteristics improved but remained non-significant. The best performing strategy according to likelihood ratios was the combined MBSS and CA19-9 to the bilirubin ratio. CONCLUSION: CA19-9 levels and the CA19-9-to-bilirubin ratio are poor predictors of survival for PAC, whereas the MBSS is a far better predictor, confirming its clinical value. By adding the CA19-9-to-bilirubin ratio to the MBSS the predictive characteristics improved.

Pretransplantation α-fetoprotein slope and milan criteria: strong predictors of hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a major cause of orthotropic liver transplantations (OLT). However, tumor recurrence remains a concern. Our group has shown that a rising natural α-fetoprotein (AFP) slope (NAS) correlates with tumor characteristics. We want to assess if a rising NAS predicts tumor recurrence. METHODS: We reviewed first OLT for HCC (n=144) at our center from 1992 to 2010. Patients with less than two AFP values before treatment were excluded (n=52). A rising NAS (>0.1 µg/L/day) was found in 28 patients whereas 64 presented a stable or dropping NAS. Demographics, pre-OLT therapy, and tumor characteristics were collected. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA, chi-square or Fisher's test, and logistic regression for recurrence after OLT. RESULTS: Demographics were similar among the recurrence (n=12) and nonrecurrence (n=80) groups. Patients who recurred received more treatment (P=0.017), had a higher number of lesions (P=0.025), a greater total tumor size (P=0.001), and a higher incidence of microvascular invasion (P=0.013). More patients exceeded the Milan criteria (75.0% vs. 31.3%, odds ratio [OR] 6.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.45-4.05, P=0.008) and had a rising NAS (58.3% vs. 26.3%, OR 3.20, 95% CI 1.11-9.22, P=0.024) among the recurrence group. NAS was also a strong predictor of microvascular invasion (P=0.040). After correcting for age and sex, both a rising NAS (OR 3.98, 95% CI 1.01-15.81, P=0.039) and nonadherence to Milan criteria (OR 5.69, 95% CI 1.14-28.38, P=0.034) were strong predictors of recurrence after OLT. CONCLUSION: The NAS is a predictor of microvascular invasion, a finding exclusive to pathology and in itself a predictor of HCC recurrence after OLT. The NAS and Milan criteria are good predictors of recurrence. These results encourage a frequent monitoring of AFP variations before OLT.

The quality of research synthesis in surgery: the case of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses populate the literature on the effectiveness of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer. The utility of this body of work is unclear. The objective of this study was to synthesize all such systematic reviews in terms of clinical effectiveness, to appraise their quality, and to determine whether areas of duplication exist across reviews. METHODS: Systematic reviews comparing laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer were identified using a comprehensive search protocol (1991 to 2008). The primary outcome was overall survival. The methodological quality of reviews was appraised using the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) instrument. Abstraction and quality appraisal was carried out by two independent reviewers. Reviews were synthesized, and outcomes were compared qualitatively. A citation analysis was carried out using simple matrices to assess the comprehensiveness of each review. RESULTS: In total, 27 reviews were included; 13 reviews included only randomized controlled trials. Rectal cancer was addressed exclusively by four reviews. There was significant overlap between review purposes, populations and, outcomes. The mean AMSTAR score (out of 11) was 5.8 (95% CI: 4.6 to 7.0). Overall survival was evaluated by ten reviews, none of which found a significant difference. Three reviews provided a selective meta-analysis of time-to-event data. Previously published systematic reviews were poorly and highly selectively referenced (mean citation ratio 0.16, 95% CI: 0.093 to 0.22). Previously published trials were not comprehensively identified and cited (mean citation ratio 0.56, 95% CI: 0.46 to 0.65). CONCLUSIONS: Numerous overlapping systematic reviews of laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer exist in the literature. Despite variable methods and quality, survival outcomes are congruent across reviews. A duplication of research efforts appears to exist in the literature. Further systematic reviews or meta-analyses are unlikely to be justified without specifying a significantly different research objective. This works lends support to the registration and updating of systematic reviews.

Expert opinion on laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer parallels evidence from a cumulative meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This study sought to synthesize survival outcomes from trials of laparoscopic and open colorectal cancer surgery, and to determine whether expert acceptance of this technology in the literature has parallel cumulative survival evidence. STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review of randomized trials was conducted. The primary outcome was survival, and meta-analysis of time-to-event data was conducted. Expert opinion in the literature (published reviews, guidelines, and textbook chapters) on the acceptability of laparoscopic colorectal cancer was graded using a 7-point scale. Pooled survival data were correlated in time with accumulating expert opinion scores. RESULTS: A total of 5,800 citations were screened. Of these, 39 publications pertaining to 23 individual trials were retained. As well, 414 reviews were included (28 guidelines, 30 textbook chapters, 20 systematic reviews, 336 narrative reviews). In total, 5,782 patients were randomized to laparoscopic (n = 3,031) and open (n = 2,751) colorectal surgery. Survival data were presented in 16 publications. Laparoscopic surgery was not inferior to open surgery in terms of overall survival (HR = 0.94, 95% CI 0.80, 1.09). Expert opinion in the literature pertaining to the oncologic acceptability of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer correlated most closely with the publication of large RCTs in 2002-2004. Although increasingly accepted since 2006, laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remained controversial. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is non-inferior to open surgery in terms of overall survival, and has been so since 2004. The majority expert opinion in the literature has considered these two techniques to be equivalent since 2002-2004. Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer has been increasingly accepted since 2006, but remains controversial. Knowledge translation efforts in this field appear to have paralleled the accumulation of clinical trial evidence.

Clostridium difficile colitis: increasing incidence, risk factors, and outcomes in solid organ transplant recipients.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea (CDAD) is an increasingly important diagnosis in solid organ transplant recipients, with rising incidence and mortality. We describe the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes of colectomy for CDAD after solid organ transplantation. METHODS: Patients with CDAD were identified from a prospective transplant database. Complicated Clostridium difficile colitis (CCDC) was defined as CDAD associated with graft loss, total colectomy, or death. RESULTS: From 1999 to 2010, we performed solid organ transplants for 1331 recipients at our institution. The incidence of CDAD was 12.4% (165 patients); it increased from 4.5% (1999) to 21.1% (2005) and finally 9.5% (2010). The peak frequency of CDAD was between 6 and 10 days posttransplantation. Age more than 55 years (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.16-1.81), induction with antithymocyte globulin (HR: 1.43, 95% CI=1.075-1.94), and transplant other than kidney alone (liver, heart, pancreas, or combined kidney organ) (HR: 1.41, 95% CI=1.05-1.92) were significant independent risk factors for CDAD. CCDC occurred in 15.8% of CDAD cases. Independent predictors of CCDC were white blood cell count more than 25,000/µL (HR: 1.08, 95% CI=1.025-1.15) and evidence of pancolitis on computed tomography scan (HR: 2.52, 95% CI=1.195-5.35). Six patients with CCDC underwent colectomy with 83% patient survival and 20% graft loss. Of the medically treated patients with CCDC (n=20), the patient survival was 35% with 100% graft loss. CONCLUSIONS: We have identified significant risk factors for CDAD and predictors of progression to CCDC. Furthermore, we found that colectomy can be performed with excellent survival in selected patients.

A clinician's guide to patient selection for watchful waiting management of inguinal hernia.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to assist surgeons in managing patients with minimally symptomatic inguinal hernia by identifying characteristics that predict crossover to surgery or worsening of hernia symptoms. BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have suggested that watchful waiting management of minimally symptomatic inguinal hernia is an acceptable alternative to surgical repair. However, these trials found that roughly a quarter of patients would elect for repair in the first 2 years, suggesting that not all patients are good candidates for watchful waiting. METHODS: The 336 patients randomized to watchful waiting in the American College of Surgeons Watchful Waiting Hernia Trial constituted the study population. Preoperative patient characteristics were used to predict 2 outcomes, either crossover to surgery or the development of hernia pain limiting activities and/or crossover to surgery. Patients in our study were part of a previously registered randomized trial: NCT00263250. RESULTS: At 2 years, 72 patients crossed over to surgery, with pain with strenuous activities [odds ratio (OR), 1.3 per 10-mm visual analog scale pain scale], chronic constipation (OR, 4.9), prostatism (OR, 2.9), being married (OR, 2.3), and good health [OR, 3.0 American Society of Anesthesiologists Class (ASA) 1 vs 2], predicting crossover. An additional 28 patients developed pain, limiting their activities, with pain during strenuous activities (OR, 1.3 per 10-mm visual analog scale) and chronic constipation (OR, 4.5), predicting the combined outcome of pain limiting activities and/or crossover to surgery. Higher levels of activity reduced the risk (OR, 0.95) of this combined outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Readily identifiable patient characteristics can predict those patients with minimally symptomatic inguinal hernia who are likely to "fail" watchful waiting hernia management. Consideration of these factors will allow surgeons to optimally tailor hernia management.