Ketamine intolerance in patients on enhanced recovery after surgery protocols undergoing colorectal operations.

BACKGROUND: Ketamine is used in enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols because of its beneficial antihyperalgesic and antitolerance effects. However, adverse effects such as hallucinations, sedation, and diplopia could limit ketamine's utility. The main objective of this study was to identify rates of ketamine side effects in postoperative patients after colorectal surgery and, secondarily, to compare short-term outcomes between patients receiving ketamine analgesia and controls. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational cohort study. Subjects were adults who underwent ERAS protocol-guided colorectal surgery at a large, integrated health system. Patients were grouped into ketamine-receiving and preketamine cohorts. Patients receiving ketamine were divided into tolerant and intolerant groups. Propensity score-adjusted models tested multivariate associations of ketamine tolerance/intolerance vs control group. RESULTS: A total of 732 patients underwent colorectal surgery within the ERAS program before ketamine's introduction (control). After ketamine's introduction, 467 patients received the medication. Intolerance was seen in 29% of ketamine recipients, and the most common side effect was diplopia. Demographics and surgical variables did not differ between cohorts. Multivariate models revealed no significant differences in hospital stays. Pain scores in the first 24 hours after surgery were slightly higher in patients receiving ketamine. Opiate consumption after surgery was lower for both ketamine tolerant and ketamine intolerant cohorts than for controls. CONCLUSION: Rates of ketamine intolerance are high, which can limit its use and potential effectiveness. Ketamine analgesia significantly reduced opiate consumption without increasing hospital stays after colorectal surgery, regardless of whether it was tolerated.

Impact of Patient-Reported Penicillin Allergy on Antibiotic Prophylaxis and Surgical Site Infection Among Patients Undergoing Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections are a major preventable source of morbidity, mortality, and increased health care expenditures after colorectal surgery. Patients with penicillin allergy may not receive the recommended preoperative antibiotics, putting them at increased risk for surgical site infections. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of patient-reported penicillin allergy on preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical site infection rates among patients undergoing major colon and rectal procedures. DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a tertiary teaching hospital in Dallas. PATIENTS: Adults undergoing colectomy or proctectomy between July 2012 and July 2019 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were preoperative antibiotic choice and surgical site infection. RESULTS: Among 2198 patients included in the study, 12.26% (n = 307) reported a penicillin allergy. Patients with penicillin allergy were more likely to be white (82%) and female (54%; p < 0.01). The most common type of allergic reaction reported was rash (36.5%), whereas 7.2% of patients reported anaphylaxis. Patients with self-reported penicillin allergy were less likely to receive beta-lactam antibiotics than patients who did not report a penicillin allergy (79.8% vs 96.7%, p < 0.001). Overall, 143 (6.5%) patients had surgical site infections. On multivariable logistic regression, there was no difference in rates of surgical site infection between patients with penicillin allergy vs those without penicillin allergy (adjusted OR 1.14; 95% CI, 0.71-1.82). LIMITATIONS: A limitation of this study was its retrospective study design. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported penicillin allergy among patients undergoing colorectal surgery is common; however, only a small number of these patients report any serious adverse reactions. Patients with self-reported penicillin allergy are less likely to receive beta-lactam antibiotics and more likely to receive non-beta-lactam antibiotics. However, this does not affect the rate of surgical site infection among these patients, and these patients can be safely prescribed non-beta-lactam antibiotics without negatively impacting surgical site infection rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B838 .IMPACTO DE LA ALERGIA A LA PENICILINA INFORMADA POR EL PACIENTE EN LA PROFILAXIS ANTIBIÓTICA Y LA INFECCIÓN DEL SITIO OPERATORIO ENTRE PACIENTES DE CIRUGÍA COLORECTAL. ANTECEDENTES: Las infecciones del sitio operatorio son una de las principales fuentes prevenibles de morbilidad, mortalidad y aumento del gasto sanitario después de cirugía colorrectal. Es posible que los pacientes con alergia a la penicilina no reciban los antibióticos preoperatorios recomendados, lo que los pone en mayor riesgo de infecciones en el sitio operatorio. OBJETIVO: Este estudio tuvo como objetivo evaluar el impacto de la alergia a la penicilina informada por el paciente sobre la profilaxis antibiótica preoperatoria y las tasas de infección del sitio operatorio entre pacientes sometidos a procedimientos mayores de colon y recto. DISEO: Estudio observacional retrospectivo. AJUSTE: Hospital universitario terciario en Dallas. PACIENTES: Adultos sometidos a colectomía o proctectomía entre julio de 2012 a julio de 2019. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE DESENLACE: Elección de antibióticos preoperatorios e infección del sitio operatorio. RESULTADOS: Entre los 2198 pacientes incluidos en el estudio, el 12,26% (n = 307) informó alergia a la penicilina. Los pacientes con alergia a la penicilina tenían más probabilidades de ser blancos (82%) y mujeres (54%) ( p < 0,01). El tipo más común de reacción alérgica notificada fue erupción cutánea (36,5%), mientras que el 7,2% de los pacientes notificó anafilaxia. Los pacientes con alergia a la penicilina autoinformada tenían menos probabilidades de recibir antibióticos betalactámicos en comparación con los pacientes que no informaron alergia a la penicilina (79,8% frente a 96,7%, p < 0,001). En general, hubo 143 (6,5%) pacientes con infecciones del sitio operatorio. En la regresión logística multivariable no hubo diferencias en las tasas de infección del sitio operatorio entre los pacientes con alergia a la penicilina frente a los que no tenían alergia a la penicilina (razón de probabilidades ajustada 1,14; intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,71-1,82). LIMITACIONES: Diseño de estudio retrospectivo. CONCLUSIONES: La alergia a la penicilina autoinformada entre los pacientes de cirugía colorrectal es común, sin embargo, solo un pequeño número de estos pacientes informan reacciones adversas graves. Los pacientes con alergia a la penicilina autoinformada tienen menos probabilidades de recibir antibióticos betalactámicos y más probabilidades de recibir antibióticos no betalactámicos. Sin embargo, esto no afecta la tasa de infección del sitio quirúrgico entre estos pacientes y se les puede recetar de forma segura con antibióticos no betalactámicos sin afectar negativamente las tasas de infección del sitio quirúrgico. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B838 . (Traducción-Dr. Juan Carlos Reyes ).

Training with cognitive load improves performance under similar conditions in a real surgical task.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing cognitive load while performing a bimanual surgical task affects performance. Whether repeated training under this condition could benefit performance in an operating room was tested using a virtual reality simulator with cognitive load applied through two-digit math multiplication questions. METHOD: 11 subjects were randomized to Control, VR and VR + CL groups. After a pre-test, VR and VR + CL groups repeated the peg transfer task 150 times over 15 sessions with cognitive load applied only for the last 100 trials. After training, all groups took a post-test and two weeks later the retention test with and without cognitive load and the transfer task on a pig intestine of 150 cm long under cognitive load. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Mixed ANOVA analysis showed significant differences between the control and VR and VR + CL groups (p = 0.013, p = 0.009) but no differences between the VR + CL and the VR groups (p = 1.0). GOALS bimanual dexterity score on transfer test show that VR + CL group outperformed both Control and VR groups (p = 0.016, p = 0.03). Training under cognitive load benefitted performance on an actual surgical task under similar conditions.

Recurrent arginine substitutions in the ACTG2 gene are the primary driver of disease burden and severity in visceral myopathy.

Visceral myopathy with abnormal intestinal and bladder peristalsis includes a clinical spectrum with megacystis-microcolon intestinal hypoperistalsis syndrome and chronic intestinal pseudo-obstruction. The vast majority of cases are caused by dominant variants in ACTG2; however, the overall genetic architecture of visceral myopathy has not been well-characterized. We ascertained 53 families, with visceral myopathy based on megacystis, functional bladder/gastrointestinal obstruction, or microcolon. A combination of targeted ACTG2 sequencing and exome sequencing was used. We report a molecular diagnostic rate of 64% (34/53), of which 97% (33/34) is attributed to ACTG2. Strikingly, missense mutations in five conserved arginine residues involving CpG dinucleotides accounted for 49% (26/53) of disease in the cohort. As a group, the ACTG2-negative cases had a more favorable clinical outcome and more restricted disease. Within the ACTG2-positive group, poor outcomes (characterized by total parenteral nutrition dependence, death, or transplantation) were invariably due to one of the arginine missense alleles. Analysis of specific residues suggests a severity spectrum of p.Arg178>p.Arg257>p.Arg40 along with other less-frequently reported sites p.Arg63 and p.Arg211. These results provide genotype-phenotype correlation for ACTG2-related disease and demonstrate the importance of arginine missense changes in visceral myopathy.

Minimally Invasive Colon Cancer Surgery.

Colon cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Advances in surgical resection techniques, including minimally invasive colectomy, are becoming a standard of care. The oncologic principles of colectomy have included adequate lymphadenectomy, proximal ligation of primary vessels, and resection with adequate longitudinal margins. More recently, complete mesocolic excision has been advocated. Open and minimally invasive approaches must accomplish the same outcomes. This article focuses on the surgical principles of colon cancer, perioperative considerations, and technical aspects of minimally invasive colectomy. We review the current literature regarding oncologic and short-term outcomes of minimally invasive surgery.

Minimally Invasive Surgery for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

Total mesorectal excision (TME) can be safely performed through a minimally invasive approach by experienced surgeons and may offer patients benefit in certain short-term outcomes. Long-term oncologic outcomes and meta-analysis of the most recent randomized controlled trials may offer additional clarity regarding the role of laparoscopic TME and those patients for whom the approach is most appropriate. Until then, laparoscopic TME should be used judiciously. As the landscape of rectal cancer surgery evolves, the necessary constant needs to be multidisciplinary oversight of rectal cancer surgery performed by surgeons and surgical centers experienced in this critically important procedure.

Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy in Locally Advanced Colon Cancer: a Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: A paucity of data exists in the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NRT) for T4, non-metastatic colon cancer. This study was conducted to determine the effect of NRT on outcomes after resection for T4 colon cancer. METHODS: All patients with non-metastatic resected clinical T4 colon cancer from 2000 to 2012 at a tertiary care center were included. The cohort was divided into two groups-those that received NRT and those that did not (non-NRT). The primary outcomes were margin-negative resection and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: One hundred and thirty-one consecutive patients with non-metastatic clinical T4 colon cancer with a mean age of 65 years were included. NRT was used in 23 patients (17.4%). NRT group was noted to have non-statistically significant improvement in R0 resection rate (NRT 95.7% vs non-NRT 88.0%; p = 0.27) and local recurrence (NRT 4.3% vs non-NRT 15.7%; p = 0.15). There was a significant difference in T-stage downstaging between the two groups (NRT 30.4% vs non-NRT 6.5%; p = 0.007). In a bivariate analysis, NRT was associated with improved 5-year OS (NRT 76.4% vs non-NRT 51.5%; p = 0.03). This relationship did not persist in a Cox proportional hazard analysis that included age and comorbidity (HR 2.19; 95% CI 0.87-5.52; p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: The use of NRT in locally advanced T4 colon cancer is safe and associated with increased downstaging. While there was a trend toward improvement in local recurrence and the ability to obtain margin-negative resections in the NRT group, this was not significant. Significantly improved overall survival was not observed in a multivariable analysis.

Preoperative Chemotherapy and Survival for Large Anorectal Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: A National Analysis of 333 Cases.

PURPOSE: Anorectal gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are exceedingly rare, and management remains controversial in regard to local resection (LR) and preoperative chemotherapy. METHODS: The National Cancer Data Base was queried from 1998 to 2012 for cases of GIST resection in the rectum or anus. Patient demographics, type of surgery (LR vs. radical excision [RE]), short-term outcomes, and overall survival (OS) were analyzed. Preoperative chemotherapy was recorded following the US FDA approval of imatinib in 2002. RESULTS: Overall, 333 patients with resection of anorectal GISTs were included. Mean age at presentation was 62.3 years (range 22-90), and median tumor size was 4.0 cm (interquartile range 2.2-7.0). Five-year OS for all patients was 77.6%. In a multivariable survival analysis, only age and tumor size >5 cm (hazard ratio 2.48, 95% confidence interval 1.50-4.01; p = 0.004) were associated with increased mortality. One hundred and sixty-three (49.0%) patients underwent LR, compared with 158 (47.4%) who underwent RE. For tumors smaller than 5 cm, no difference in 5-year survival by surgical approach was observed (LR 82.3% vs. RE 82.6%; p = 0.71). Fifty-nine patients (17.7%) received preoperative chemotherapy; for patients undergoing RE with tumors >5 cm, there was decreased mortality in the group who received preoperative chemotherapy (5-year OS with chemotherapy 79.2% vs. no chemotherapy 51.2%; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Size is the most important determinant in survival following resection. Local excision is common, with resection split between LR and RE. For smaller tumors, LR may be adequate therapy. Preoperative chemotherapy may result in improved survival for large tumors treated with radical resection, but the data are imperfect.

Omission of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Is Associated With Increased Mortality in Patients With T3N0 Colon Cancer With Inadequate Lymph Node Harvest.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy for T3N0 colon cancer is controversial. National guidelines recommend its use in patients with stage II with high-risk features, including lymph node harvest of less than 12, yet this treatment is underused. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to demonstrate that the use of adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with T3N0 adenocarcinoma with inadequate lymph node harvest is beneficial. DESIGN: This was a retrospective population-based study of patients with resected T3N0 adenocarcinoma of the colon. SETTINGS: The National Cancer Database was queried from 2003 to 2012. PATIENTS: A total of 134,567 patients with T3N0 colon cancer were included in this analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The use of chemotherapy, short-term outcomes, and overall survival was evaluated. Clinicopathologic factors associated with omission of chemotherapy were also analyzed. RESULTS: Inadequate lymph node harvest was observed in 23.3% of patients, and this rate decreased over the study period from 46.8% in 2003 to 12.5% in 2012 (p < 0.0001). Overall 5-year survival for patients with T3N0 cancer was 66.8%. Inadequate lymph node harvest among these patients was associated with lower overall 5-year survival (58.7% vs 69.8%; p < 0.001). The use of adjuvant chemotherapy among patients with T3N0 cancer after inadequate lymph node harvest was only 16.7%. In a multivariable analysis, factors associated with failure to receive chemotherapy included advanced age (OR = 0.44 (95% CI, 0.43-0.45)), increased comorbidities (OR = 0.7 (95% CI, 0.66-0.76)), and postoperative readmission (OR = 0.78 (95% CI, 0.67-0.91)). Patients with inadequate lymph node harvest who received adjuvant chemotherapy had improved 5-year survival (chemotherapy, 78.4% vs no chemotherapy, 54.7%; p < 0.001). Even when controlling for all of the significant variables, the administration of chemotherapy remained a predictor of decreased mortality (HR = 0.57 (95% CI, 0.54-0.60); p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective, population-based design. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T3N0 colon cancer with inadequate lymph node harvest who receive adjuvant chemotherapy have increased overall survival. Despite this survival benefit, a fraction of these patients receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Barriers to chemotherapy are multifactorial.