Similar success rate in proximal and distal colonic stent placement: a retrospective multi-center study.

OBJECTIVES: Stenting of malignant colon obstruction is used as a bridge to surgery or as an alternative to surgical colostomy in a palliative setting. Current guidelines recommend stent placement as the first line of treatment in colonic obstruction in both curative and palliative settings. However, it is unclear whether the location of the malignant obstruction influences the outcome of the stenting procedure. The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of colonic stents between proximal and distal colonic strictures with regard to technical and clinical success and the risk of adverse events. METHODS: A multi-center retrospective cohort was composed of patients who underwent a colonic stent placement at two tertiary hospitals between 2013 and 2021. The technical and clinical outcome, stent type used, duration of post-procedural hospital stay and complications were noted. RESULTS: A total of 148 patients who underwent colonic stenting were identified. 41 patients underwent stent placement in the proximal colon and 107 patients underwent a distal stent placement. There was no difference in technical success (100% vs 96.3%, p = 0.209), clinical success (97.0% vs 89.6%, p = 0.199) or complications (24.4% vs 37.4%, p = 0,135). CONCLUSION: Technical success and clinical success rates are high and do not differ between stent locations. There is no significant difference in complication rates between proximal and distal colonic stents.

Severity of Dementia and Survival in Patients Diagnosed with Colorectal Cancer: A National Cohort Study in England and Wales.

AIMS: There is little evidence about the survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) also diagnosed with dementia. We quantified dementia severity and estimated how it is associated with 2-year overall survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Records of patients aged 65 years or older diagnosed with CRC in England and Wales were identified. A novel proxy for dementia severity combined dementia diagnosis in administrative hospital data with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios with and without risk adjustment. RESULTS: In total, 4033 of 105 250 CRC patients (3.8%) had dementia recorded. Two-year survival decreased with increasing dementia severity from 65.4% without dementia, 53.5% with mild dementia, 33.0% with moderate dementia to 16.5% with severe dementia (hazard ratio comparing severe with no dementia: 2.97; 95% confidence interval 2.79, 3.16). Risk adjustment for comorbidity and cancer stage reduced this association slightly (hazard ratio 2.52; 95% confidence interval 2.37, 2.68) and additional adjustment for treatment factors reduced it further (hazard ratio 1.60; 95% confidence interval 1.50, 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Survival of CRC patients varied strongly according to dementia severity, suggesting that a 'one-size-fits-all' policy for the care of CRC patients with dementia is not appropriate. Comprehensive assessment of cancer patients with dementia that considers dementia severity is essential in a shared decision-making process that ensures patients receive the most appropriate treatment for their individual needs and preferences.

Operative blood loss adversely affects short and long-term outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of operative blood loss on short and long-term outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were performed, from inception to the 10th of August 2020. A comprehensive literature search was performed on the 10th of August 2020 of PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Only studies reporting on operative blood loss and postoperative short term or long-term outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Forty-three studies were included, reporting on 59,813 patients. Increased operative blood loss was associated with higher morbidity, for blood loss greater than 150-350 ml (odds ratio [OR] 2.09, p < 0.001) and > 500 ml (OR 2.29, p = 0.007). Anastomotic leak occurred more frequently for blood loss above a range of 50-100 ml (OR 1.14, p = 0.007), 250-300 ml (OR 2.06, p < 0.001), and 400-500 ml (OR 3.15, p < 0.001). Postoperative ileus rate was higher for blood loss > 100-200 ml (OR 1.90, p = 0.02). Surgical site infections were more frequent above 200-500 ml (OR 1.96, p = 0.04). Hospital stay was increased for blood loss > 150-200 ml (OR 1.63, p = 0.04). Operative blood loss was significantly higher in patients that suffered morbidity (mean difference [MD] 133.16 ml, p < 0.001) or anastomotic leak (MD 69.56 ml, p = 0.02). In the long term, increased operative blood loss was associated with worse overall survival above a range of 200-500 ml (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15, p < 0.001), and worse recurrence-free survival above 200-400 ml (HR 1.33, p = 0.01). Increased blood loss was associated with small bowel obstruction caused by colorectal cancer recurrence for blood loss higher than 400 ml (HR 1.97, p = 0.03) and 800 ml (HR 3.78, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Increased operative blood loss may adversely impact short term and long-term postoperative outcomes. Measures should be taken to minimize operative blood loss during colorectal cancer surgery. Due to the uncertainty of evidence identified, further research, with standardised methodology, is required on this important subject.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing energy devices used in colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare energy devices used for intraoperative hemostasis during colorectal surgery. METHODS: A systematic literature review and Bayesian network meta-analysis performed. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and Cochrane were searched from inception to August 11th 2021. Intraoperative outcomes were operative blood loss, operative time, conversion to open, conversion to another energy source. Postoperative outcomes were mortality, overall complications, minor complications and major complications, wound complications, postoperative ileus, anastomotic leak, time to first defecation, day 1 and 3 drainage volume, duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included, reporting on 680 participants, comparing conventional hemostasis, LigaSure™, Thunderbeat® and Harmonic®. Harmonic® had fewer overall complications compared to conventional hemostasis. Operative blood loss was less with LigaSure™ (mean difference [MD] = 24.1 ml; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 46.54 to - 1.58 ml) or Harmonic® (MD = 24.6 ml; 95% CI - 42.4 to - 6.7 ml) compared to conventional techniques. Conventional hemostasis ranked worst for operative blood loss with high probability (p = 0.98). LigaSure™, Harmonic® or Thunderbeat® resulted in a significantly shorter mean operative time by 42.8 min (95% CI - 53.9 to - 31.5 min), 28.3 min (95% CI - 33.6 to - 22.6 min) and 26.1 min (95% CI - 46 to - 6 min), respectively compared to conventional electrosurgery. LigaSure™ resulted in a significantly shorter mean operative time than Harmonic® by 14.5 min (95% CI 1.9-27 min) and ranked first for operative time with high probability (p = 0.97). LigaSure™ and Harmonic® resulted in a significantly shorter mean duration of hospital stay compared to conventional electrosurgery of 1.3 days (95% CI - 2.2 to - 0.4) and 0.5 days (95% CI - 1 to - 0.1), respectively. LigaSure™ ranked as best for hospital stay with high probability (p = 0.97). Conventional hemostasis was associated with more wound complications than Harmonic® (odds ratio [OR] = 0.27; CI 0.08-0.92). Harmonic® ranked best with highest probability (p = 0.99) for wound complications. No significant differences between energy devices were identified for the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: LigaSure™, Thunderbeat® and Harmonic® may be advantageous for reducing operative blood loss, operative time, overall complications, wound complications, and duration of hospital stay compared to conventional techniques. The energy devices result in comparable perioperative outcomes and no device is superior overall. However, included RCTs were limited in number and size, and data were not available to compare all energy devices for all outcomes of interest.

International consensus definition of low anterior resection syndrome.

AIM: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is pragmatically defined as disordered bowel function after rectal resection leading to a detriment in quality of life. This broad characterization does not allow for precise estimates of prevalence. The LARS score was designed as a simple tool for clinical evaluation of LARS. Although the LARS score has good clinical utility, it may not capture all important aspects that patients may experience. The aim of this collaboration was to develop an international consensus definition of LARS that encompasses all aspects of the condition and is informed by all stakeholders. METHOD: This international patient-provider initiative used an online Delphi survey, regional patient consultation meetings, and an international consensus meeting. Three expert groups participated: patients, surgeons and other health professionals from five regions (Australasia, Denmark, Spain, Great Britain and Ireland, and North America) and in three languages (English, Spanish, and Danish). The primary outcome measured was the priorities for the definition of LARS. RESULTS: Three hundred twenty-five participants (156 patients) registered. The response rates for successive rounds of the Delphi survey were 86%, 96% and 99%. Eighteen priorities emerged from the Delphi survey. Patient consultation and consensus meetings refined these priorities to eight symptoms and eight consequences that capture essential aspects of the syndrome. Sampling bias may have been present, in particular, in the patient panel because social media was used extensively in recruitment. There was also dominance of the surgical panel at the final consensus meeting despite attempts to mitigate this. CONCLUSION: This is the first definition of LARS developed with direct input from a large international patient panel. The involvement of patients in all phases has ensured that the definition presented encompasses the vital aspects of the patient experience of LARS. The novel separation of symptoms and consequences may enable greater sensitivity to detect changes in LARS over time and with intervention.

Establishing core outcome sets for gastrointestinal recovery in studies of postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction: protocol for a nested methodological study.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal recovery describes the restoration of normal bowel function in patients with bowel disease. This may be prolonged in two common clinical settings: postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction. Improving gastrointestinal recovery is a research priority but researchers are limited by variation in outcome reporting across clinical studies. This protocol describes the development of core outcome sets for gastrointestinal recovery in the contexts of postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction. METHOD: An international Steering Group consisting of patient and clinician representatives has been established. As overlap between clinical contexts is anticipated, both outcome sets will be co-developed and may be combined to form a common output with disease-specific domains. The development process will comprise three phases, including definition of outcomes relevant to postoperative ileus and small bowel obstruction from systematic literature reviews and nominal-group stakeholder discussions; online-facilitated Delphi surveys via international networks; and a consensus meeting to ratify the final output. A nested study will explore if the development of overlapping outcome sets can be rationalized. DISSEMINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION: The final output will be registered with the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials initiative. A multi-faceted, quality improvement campaign for the reporting of gastrointestinal recovery in clinical studies will be launched, targeting international professional and patient groups, charitable organizations and editorial committees. Success will be explored via an updated systematic review of outcomes 5 years after registration of the core outcome set.

National prospective cohort study of the burden of acute small bowel obstruction.

Background: Small bowel obstruction is a common surgical emergency, and is associated with high levels of morbidity and mortality across the world. The literature provides little information on the conservatively managed group. The aim of this study was to describe the burden of small bowel obstruction in the UK. Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted in 131 acute hospitals in the UK between January and April 2017, delivered by trainee research collaboratives. Adult patients with a diagnosis of mechanical small bowel obstruction were included. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included complications, unplanned intensive care admission and readmission within 30 days of discharge. Practice measures, including use of radiological investigations, water soluble contrast, operative and nutritional interventions, were collected. Results: Of 2341 patients identified, 693 (29·6 per cent) underwent immediate surgery (within 24 h of admission), 500 (21·4 per cent) had delayed surgery after initial conservative management, and 1148 (49·0 per cent) were managed non-operatively. The mortality rate was 6·6 per cent (6·4 per cent for non-operative management, 6·8 per cent for immediate surgery, 6·8 per cent for delayed surgery; P = 0·911). The major complication rate was 14·4 per cent overall, affecting 19·0 per cent in the immediate surgery, 23·6 per cent in the delayed surgery and 7·7 per cent in the non-operative management groups (P < 0·001). Cox regression found hernia or malignant aetiology and malnutrition to be associated with higher rates of death. Malignant aetiology, operative intervention, acute kidney injury and malnutrition were associated with increased risk of major complication. Conclusion: Small bowel obstruction represents a significant healthcare burden. Patient-level factors such as timing of surgery, acute kidney injury and nutritional status are factors that might be modified to improve outcomes.

Making an IMPACT: A priority setting consultation exercise to improve outcomes in patients with locally advanced, recurrent and metastatic colorectal cancer.

AIM: The IMPACT (Improving the Management of Patients with Advanced Colorectal Tumours) initiative was established by the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland in 2017 as a consortium of surgeons (colorectal, hepatobiliary, thoracic), oncologists, radiologists, pathologists, palliative care physicians, patients, carers and charity stakeholders who will work together to improve outcomes in patients with advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer. To establish this initiative, better information is required to establish how further intervention is focused. This paper details the approaches used, and outcomes generated, from a priority setting exercise to inform the design of the IMPACT initiative. METHODS: A mixed method approach was employed to set the priorities of patients, clinicians and other key stakeholders in the delivery of optimal care. This consisted of two patient centered consultation events and a questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 128 participants took part in the consultation exercise; 15 patients, 5 carers/family members, 5 charity representatives and 113 healthcare professionals. Nine key themes for focus were identified, these were: current service provision, specialist services, communication, education, access to care, definitions and standardisation, research and audit, outcome measures, and funding of specialist care. CONCLUSION: These future priorities will be developed with collaborative engagement in a systematic manner to produce an overall cohesive programme which will deliver a sustainable and efficient clinical and academic service to improving the management of patients with advanced colorectal tumours.

Preoperative bowel stimulation prior to ileostomy closure to restore bowel function more quickly and improve postoperative outcomes: a systematic review.

AIM: Closure of a diverting ileostomy following restorative surgery is often associated with significant short-term morbidity and variable long-term bowel function. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate if preoperative stimulation of the defunctioned bowel restores bowel function more quickly after ileostomy closure and improves postoperative outcomes when compared with standard preoperative care. METHOD: MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies evaluating preoperative bowel stimulation in patients with a temporary ileostomy after low anterior resection or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis, regardless of their design, publication type or language. Study selection, data extraction and study assessment were performed by one reviewer and verified by another. Study results were synthesized narratively. The GRADE approach was used to assess the quality of evidence. RESULTS: Eight studies involving a total of 267 participants were included. The studies had a moderate to high risk of bias and were of varying methodological quality. Preoperative stimulation of the defunctioned bowel reduced the time to postoperative restoration of bowel function and the length of hospital stay when compared with standard preoperative care. Other functional outcomes and postoperative complication rates were similar to those of standard preoperative care. The overall quality of evidence was very low. CONCLUSION: Despite these promising early results, there is insufficient high-quality evidence to recommend routine implementation of preoperative bowel stimulation in clinical practice. Nevertheless, there is no evidence suggesting that the intervention worsens outcomes or is unsafe, paving the way for rigorous assessment of effectiveness, acceptability and cost-effectiveness within the context of well-designed clinical trials.

Systematic review of definitions and outcome measures for return of bowel function after gastrointestinal surgery.

Background: Ileus is common after gastrointestinal surgery and has been identified as a research priority. Several issues have limited previous research, including a widely accepted definition and agreed outcome measure. This review is the first stage in the development of a core outcome set for the return of bowel function after gastrointestinal surgery. It aims to characterize the extent of variation in current outcome reporting. Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) and the Cochrane Library was performed for 1990-2017. RCTs of adults undergoing gastrointestinal surgery, including at least one reported measure relating to return of bowel function, were eligible. Trial registries were searched across the same period for ongoing and completed (but not published) RCTs. Definitions of ileus and outcome measures describing the return of bowel function were extracted. Results: Of 5670 manuscripts screened, 215 (reporting 217 RCTs) were eligible. Most RCTs involved patients undergoing colorectal surgery (161 of 217, 74·2 per cent). A total of 784 outcomes were identified across all published RCTs, comprising 73 measures (clinical: 63, 86 per cent; radiological: 6, 8 per cent; physiological: 4, 5 per cent). The most commonly reported outcome measure was 'time to first passage of flatus' (140 of 217, 64·5 per cent). The outcomes 'ileus' and 'prolonged ileus' were defined infrequently and variably. Conclusion: Outcome reporting for the return of bowel function after gastrointestinal surgery is variable and not fit for purpose. An agreed core outcome set will improve the consistency, reliability and clinical value of future studies.

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland consensus guidelines in surgery for inflammatory bowel disease.

AIM: There is a requirement of an expansive and up to date review of surgical management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) that can dovetail with the medical guidelines produced by the British Society of Gastroenterology. METHODS: Surgeons who are members of the ACPGBI with a recognised interest in IBD were invited to contribute various sections of the guidelines. They were directed to produce a procedure based document using literature searches that were systematic, comprehensible, transparent and reproducible. Levels of evidence were graded. An editorial board was convened to ensure consistency of style, presentation and quality. Each author was asked to provide a set of recommendations which were evidence based and unambiguous. These recommendations were submitted to the whole guideline group and scored. They were then refined and submitted to a second vote. Only those that achieved >80% consensus at level 5 (strongly agree) or level 4 (agree) after 2 votes were included in the guidelines. RESULTS: All aspects of surgical care for IBD have been included along with 157 recommendations for management. CONCLUSION: These guidelines provide an up to date and evidence based summary of the current surgical knowledge in the management of IBD and will serve as a useful practical text for clinicians performing this type of surgery.

Optimizing collaborator recruitment and maintaining engagement via social media during large multicentre studies: lessons learned from the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction (NASBO).

AIM: The National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction was a UK-wide study active in early 2017. A Twitter© account was used to interact with collaborators and the public throughout the study to assess whether the use of social media improved study engagement and to establish which Tweet signature styles achieved the highest levels of reach and engagement. METHOD: Twitter© analytics for @NASBO2017 covering June 2016-May 2017 were reviewed. The number of impressions, Tweet engagements and the engagement rate were analysed according to study stage. RESULTS: A total of 176 Tweets were made over the study period. The median number of impressions achieved by a Tweet was 533 (75-2709). 3863 engagements were made with National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction Tweets with a median number of 10 (0-159) per Tweet. The average overall Tweet engagement rate was 3.3% (0%-14.2%). Tweets with most impressions either used images or tagged institutions (e.g. Royal Colleges, professional bodies). The number of impressions and engagement with the Tweets increased over the study period, due to the incremental growth of the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction Twitter© account and the identification of successful Tweet styles. CONCLUSIONS: Social media provided a major contribution to a successful concerted policy of maintaining collaborator engagement during the National Audit of Small Bowel Obstruction. The use of images and videos and tagging of relevant professional bodies aided the reach and engagement of each Tweet. These data can be used to inform engagement strategies for future collaborative projects.

The colorectal surgeon's personality may influence the rectal anastomotic decision.

AIM: Colorectal surgeons regularly make the decision to anastomose, defunction or form an end colostomy when performing rectal surgery. This study aimed to define personality traits of colorectal surgeons and explore any influence of such traits on the decision to perform a rectal anastomosis. METHOD: Fifty attendees of The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland 2016 Conference participated. After written consent, all underwent personality testing: alexithymia (inability to understand emotions), type of thinking process (intuitive versus rational) and personality traits (extraversion, agreeableness, openness, emotional stability, conscientiousness). Questions were answered regarding anastomotic decisions in various clinical scenarios and results analysed to reveal any influence of the surgeon's personality on anastomotic decision. RESULTS: Participants were: male (86%), consultants (84%) and based in England (68%). Alexithymia was low (4%) with 81% displaying intuitive thinking (reflex, fast). Participants scored higher in emotional stability (ability to remain calm) and conscientiousness (organized, methodical) compared with population norms. Personality traits influenced the next anastomotic decision if: surgeons had recently received criticism at a departmental audit meeting; were operating with an anaesthetist that was not their regular one; or there had been no anastomotic leaks in their patients for over 1 year. CONCLUSION: Colorectal surgeons have speciality relevant personalities that potentially influence the important decision to anastomose and could explain the variation in surgical practice across the UK. Future work should explore these findings in other countries and any link of personality traits to patient-related outcomes.

Review of current practice and outcomes following ileoanal pouch surgery: lessons learned from the Ileoanal Pouch Registry and the 2017 Ileoanal Pouch Report.

AIM: The second Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) Ileoanal Pouch Registry (IPR) report was released in July 2017 following a first report in 2012. This article provides a summary of data derived from the most recent IPR report (2017 Ileoanal Pouch Report. https://www.acpgbi.org.uk/content/uploads/2016/07/Ileoanal-Pouch-Report-2017-FINAL.compressed.pdf). METHOD: The IPR is an electronic database of voluntarily submitted data including patient demographics, disease, intra-operative and postoperative factors submitted by consultant surgeons or delegates. Data up to 31 March 2017 have been analysed for this report. RESULTS: A total of 5352 pouch operations were carried out at 76 UK and four European centres by 154 surgeons over four decades. Recorded procedures have increased over time but data submission is voluntary and underestimates actual volume. Significant variation exists in institutional volume; 73 centres entered data on patients undergoing pouch surgery during the past 5 years. Of these, 44 centres have submitted ≤ 10 cases, with 10 centres submitting one patient and nine centres two cases. Since 2013, minimal access surgery has been employed in 54% of cases. Rectal dissection was undertaken in the total mesorectal excision plane in 69%. J-pouch configuration was used in 99% of cases and 90% of pouch-anal anastomoses were performed using a stapled technique. Including all years, the IPR rate of pelvic sepsis was 9.4% and the rate of pouch failure was 4.7%. CONCLUSION: The IPR holds the largest voluntary repository of data on ileoanal pouch surgery. The second report from the IPR records marked refinements in surgical technique over time but also highlights wide variation in institutional caseload and outcome across the UK.

Patients with perianal Crohn's fistulas experience delays in accessing anti-TNF therapy due to slow recognition, diagnosis and integration of specialist services: lessons learned from three referral centres.

AIM: Crohn's anal fistula should be managed by a multidisciplinary team. There is no clearly defined 'patient pathway' from presentation to treatment. The aim of this study was to describe the patient route from presentation with symptomatic Crohn's anal fistula to starting anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapy. METHOD: Case note review was undertaken at three hospitals with established inflammatory bowel disease services. Patients with Crohn's anal fistula presenting between 2010 and 2015 were identified through clinical coding and local databases. Baseline demographics were captured. Patient records were interrogated to identify route of access, and clinical contacts during the patient pathway. RESULTS: Seventy-nine patients were included in the study, of whom 54 (68%) had an established diagnosis of Crohn's disease (CD). Median time from presentation to anti-TNF therapy was 204 days (174 vs 365 days for existing and new diagnosis of CD, respectively; P = 0.019). The mean number of surgical outpatient attendances, operations and MRI scans per patient was 1.03, 1.71 and 1.03, respectively. Patients attended a mean of 1.49 medical clinics. Seton insertion was the most common procedure, accounting for 48.6% of all operations. Where care episodes ('clinical events per 30 days') were infrequent this correlated with prolongation of the pathway (r = -0.87; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: This study highlights two key challenges in the treatment pathway: (i) delays in diagnosis of underlying CD in patients with anal fistula and (ii) the pathway to anti-TNF therapy is long, suggesting issues with service design and delivery. These should be addressed to improve patient experience and outcome.