Short-Stay Left Colectomy for Colon Cancer: Is It Safe?

BACKGROUND: Advances in surgical practices have decreased hospital length of stay (LOS) after surgery. This study aimed to determine the safety of short-stay (≤24-hour) left colectomy for colon cancer patients in the US. STUDY DESIGN: Adult colon cancer patients who underwent elective left colectomies were identified using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP database (2012 to 2021). Patients were categorized into 4 LOS groups: LOS 1 day or less (≤24-hour short stay), 2 to 4, 5 to 6, and 7 or more. Primary outcomes were 30-day postoperative overall and serious morbidity. Secondary outcomes were 30-day mortality and readmission. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to explore the association between LOS and overall and serious morbidity. RESULTS: A total of 15,745 patients who underwent left colectomies for colon cancer were identified with 294 (1.87%) patients undergoing short stay. Short-stay patients were generally younger and healthier with lower 30-day overall morbidity rates (LOS ≤1 day: 3.74%, 2 to 4: 7.38%, 5 to 6: 16.12%, and ≥7: 37.64%, p < 0.001). Compared with patients with LOS 2 to 4 days, no differences in mortality and readmission rates were observed. On adjusted analysis, there was no statistical difference in the odds of overall (LOS 2 to 4 days: odds ratio 1.90, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.60, p = 0.049) and serious morbidity (LOS 2 to 4 days: odds ratio 0.86, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.76, p = 0.672) between the short-stay and LOS 2 to 4 days groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although currently performed at low rates in the US, short-stay left colectomy is safe for a select group of patients. Attention to patient selection, refinement of clinical pathways, and close follow-up may enable short-stay colectomies to become a more feasible reality.

National trends and feasibility of a robotic surgical approach in the management of patients with inflammatory bowel disease.

BACKGROUND: Research on the utilization of robotic surgical approaches in the management of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) is limited. The aims of this study were to identify temporal trends in robotic utilization and compare the safety of a robotic to laparoscopic operative approach in patients with IBD. METHODS: Patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for IBD were identified using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database (2013-2021). Temporal trends of robotic utilization were assessed from 2013 to 2021. Primary (30-day overall and serious morbidity) and secondary (unplanned conversion to open) outcomes were assessed between 2019 and 2021, when robotic utilization was highest. Multivariable logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: The use of a robotic approach for colectomies and proctectomies increased significantly between 2013 and 2021 (p < 0.001), regardless of disease type. A total of 6016 patients underwent MIS for IBD between 2019 and 2021. 2234 (37%) patients had surgery for UC [robotic 430 (19.3%), lap 1804 (80%)] and 3782 (63%) had surgery for CD [robotic 500 (13.2%), lap 3282 (86.8%)]. For patients with UC, there was no difference in rates of overall morbidity (22.6% vs. 20.7%, p = 0.39), serious morbidity (11.4% vs. 12.3%, p = 0.60) or conversion to open (1.5% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.38) between the laparoscopic and robotic approaches, respectively. There was no difference in overall morbidity between the two groups in patients with CD (lap 14.0% vs robotic 16.4%, p = 0.15), however the robotic group exhibited higher rates of serious morbidity (7.3% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.01), shorter LOS (3 vs. 4 days, p < 0.001) and lower rates of conversion to an open procedure (3.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.02). Adjusted analysis showed similar results. CONCLUSION: The use of the robotic platform in the surgical management of IBD is increasing and is not associated with an increase in 30-day overall morbidity compared to a laparoscopic approach.

Disparities in utilization of robotic surgery for colon cancer: an evaluation of the U.S. National Cancer Database.

Despite the benefits of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal procedures, significant disparities in access to these techniques remain. While these gaps have been well-documented for laparoscopy, few studies have evaluated inequalities in access to robotic surgery. We analyze whether disparities exist in the use of robotic surgery in the management of colon cancer. The U.S. National Cancer Database was queried for patients with non-metastatic colon adenocarcinoma who underwent resection with the robotic platform (2010-2016). Demographic, clinicopathologic, and treatment facility-related variables were analyzed with respect to preferential utilization of robotic surgery with multivariable logistic regression. Patients with metastatic disease, missing or incomplete surgical information, and those who underwent local tumor excision were excluded. 74,984 patients were identified, 3001 (4%) of whom underwent robotic surgery. In multivariable analysis, patients who were older, Black, or were living in an urban area had decreased odds of receiving robotic surgery compared with open or laparoscopic surgery. Patients who were privately insured or living in areas with higher education had increased odds of receiving robotic surgery. Robotic surgery was also preferentially associated with lower clinical stage, more recent year of diagnosis, and hospitals with higher procedural volume. As advantages of the robotic platform are becoming better understood, use of this approach is increasing in popularity for treatment of non-metastatic colon cancer. Despite this, significant disparities exist with respect to patient demographics and socioeconomic factors, and access may only be limited to certain types of hospitals. Further studies are needed to define why these inequalities exist.

Short-term outcomes following resection of right colon diverticulitis: a comparison of open and minimally invasive approaches using the NSQIP database.

BACKGROUND: Right colon diverticulitis is a rare disease process for which there are no established treatment guidelines, and outcomes following surgical management are underreported in the literature. We sought to describe the demographics of patients undergoing ileocecectomy for right colon diverticulitis and compare short-term postoperative outcomes between open and minimally invasive approaches. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) was queried for patients with diverticulitis of the colon who underwent ileocecectomy between 2012 and 2019. Patients with ascites, disseminated cancer, ASA class 5, and patients requiring mechanical ventilation were excluded. Preoperative, intraoperative, and 30-day postoperative outcomes were compared between the groups using both univariable chi-square or t-tests and multivariable logistical regression models. RESULTS: 484 patients met inclusion criteria, 150 (31%) of whom underwent open surgery and 334 (69%) who underwent minimally invasive surgery with an 18% conversion rate. 71% of patients were White, 11% of were Black, 7% were Hispanic, and 5% were Asian. The indication for surgery differed significantly by approach with acute diverticulitis representing 47% of indications for open cases and 25% for MIS cases (p < 0.0001). After adjusting for possible confounders, patients undergoing the open approach had a significantly higher chance of post-operative sepsis (p = 0.009) and ileus (p = 0.04) compared with MIS. Hospital length of stay was also significantly shorter after MIS compared to open (5.9 days vs. 11.5 days; p < 0.0001). Mean operative time was significantly longer in MIS than open (173 min vs. 198 min; p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Our analysis demonstrates that minimally invasive surgery is associated with equivalent or improved short-term morbidity and shorter hospital stay despite longer mean operative time. Interestingly, unlike other countries where the prevalence of right colon diverticulitis is higher, a minority of patients requiring operative therapy in our study of patients in the Western hemisphere were of Asian descent.

Comparing outcomes for non-metastatic rectal cancer in academic vs. community centers: A propensity-matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the impact of hospital academic status on outcomes following rectal cancer surgery. We compare these outcomes for nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma at academic versus community institutions. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2010-2016) was queried for patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent resection. Propensity score matching was performed across facility cohorts to balance confounding covariates. Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox-proportional hazards regression were used to analyze survival, other short and long-term outcomes were analyzed by way of logistic regression. RESULTS: After matching, 15,096 patients were included per cohort. Academic centers were associated with significantly decreased odds of conversion and positive margins with significantly increased odds of ≥12 regional nodes examined. Academic programs also had decreased odds of 30 and 90-day mortality and decreased 5-year mortality hazard. After matching for facility volume, no significant differences in outcomes between centers was seen. CONCLUSIONS: No difference between academic and community centers in outcomes following surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer was seen after matching for facility procedural volume.

Lymphovascular Invasion and Perineural Invasion Negatively Impact Overall Survival for Stage II Adenocarcinoma of the Colon.

BACKGROUND: Lymphovascular invasion and perineural invasion are histopathological features associated with higher-risk colon cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to quantify the impact of lymphovascular and perineural invasion on overall survival after diagnosis and to determine the protective effect of adjuvant chemotherapy for early adenocarcinoma with high-risk factors. DESIGN: This was a retrospective database review of the 2010-2014 National Cancer Database for colon cancer. SETTINGS: Individuals diagnosed with invasive adenocarcinoma of the colon (histology code 8140) with primary surgical resection with >12 nodes harvested and no positive nodes on pathological examination were included. PATIENTS: A total of 32,493 patients underwent surgical resection for stage II adenocarcinoma of the colon. INTERVENTIONS: The study involved multivariate Cox regression analysis of the impact of lymphovascular and perineural invasion and adjuvant chemotherapy on overall survival after a diagnosis of stage II adenocarcinoma of the colon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival after a diagnosis of stage II adenocarcinoma of the colon was measured. RESULTS: Five-year survival after diagnosis and surgical resection without adjuvant chemotherapy was lower for patients with lymphovascular (60.0%), perineural (56.9%), and lymphovascular and perineural invasion (55.8%) compared with double-negative disease (66.1%). Log-rank testing confirmed that adjuvant chemotherapy improved 5-year survival after diagnosis for lymphovascular (85.5%), perineural (83.6%), and lymphovascular and perineural invasion (74.3%). After controlling for differences in cohorts, Cox regression analysis showed an increased HR for mortality of 14.0% for lymphovascular (HR = 1.141 (95% CI, 1.060-1.228)), 32.1% for perineural (HR = 1.321 (95% CI, 1.176-1.483)), and 41.0% for lymphovascular and perineural invasion (HR = 1.409 (95% CI, 1.231-1.612)) compared with having neither. Chemotherapy showed a 43% reduction in hazard for mortality (HR = 0.570 (95% CI, 0.513-0.633)). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective review and observational bias. CONCLUSIONS: Lymphovascular and perineural invasion have a detrimental effect on survival after diagnosis of stage II adenocarcinoma of the colon. Chemotherapy may be protective specifically when lymphovascular and perineural invasion are present. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A786.

Intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive right colectomy: A multi-center propensity score-matched comparison of outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The primary objective of this study was to retrospectively compare short-term outcomes of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis for minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic-assisted right colectomies for benign and malignant disease. Recent studies suggest potential short-term outcomes advantages for the intracorporeal anastomosis technique. METHODS: This is a multicenter retrospective propensity score-matched comparison of intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis techniques for laparoscopic and robotic-assisted right colectomy between January 11, 2010, and July 21, 2016. RESULTS: After propensity score-matching, there were a total of 1029 minimal invasive surgery cases for analysis-379 right colectomies (335 robotic-assisted and 44 laparoscopic) done with an intracorporeal anastomosis and 650 right colectomies (253 robotic-assisted and 397 laparoscopic) done with an extracorporeal anastomosis. There were no significant differences in any preoperative patient characteristics between groups. The minimally invasive intracorporeal anastomosis group had significantly longer operative times (p<0.0001), lower conversion to open rate (p = 0.01), shorter hospital length of stay (p = 0.02) and lower complication rate from after discharge to 30-days (p = 0.04) than the extracorporeal anastomosis group. CONCLUSIONS: This comparison shows several clinical outcomes advantages for the intracorporeal anastomosis technique in minimally invasive right colectomy. These data may guide future refinements in minimally invasive training techniques and help surgeons choose among different minimally invasive options.

Multidisciplinary teams in the management of rectal cancer.

A myriad of advances in the treatment of rectal cancer have been achieved over the last few decades. The introduction of total mesorectal excision (TME) has resulted in significant improvements in local recurrence. Surgical education on the technique has made it the standard of care. Radiation and chemotherapy combined with TME have improved results even further with stage II and III cancers. Sphincter-sparing techniques, reservoir procedures, local treatment advances, minimally invasive techniques, surgery for metastatic disease, newer chemotherapies, and extended resections for locally advanced and recurrent lesions, have all benefited the patient with rectal cancer. The goal and responsibility of colorectal surgeons treating rectal cancer patients is to understand and coordinate the wide variety of modalities available to optimize survival, minimize morbidity, and maximize quality of life for those with this difficult problem. Coordination of specialists in this time of evolution in rectal cancer treatment becomes more important than ever. Here the authors briefly review the role of the multidisciplinary team, discuss a model multidisciplinary team approach and look at evidence supporting team use as we begin this issue devoted to the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer.

Cyclosporine inhibits endotoxin-induced vasodilation of isolated rat resistance arterioles.

BACKGROUND: An isolated arteriole fails to dilate in response to endotoxin unless a segment of aorta is included in the perfusion system. The unknown substance released by the aorta after exposure to endotoxin is dependent upon the NF-kappaB pathway and induces inducible nitric oxide synthase (iNOS) in the arteriole. The purpose of this study was to determine if cyclosporine A (CSA) that inhibits both NF-kappaB and iNOS would prevent the vasodilatory response to endotoxin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Rats were injected with either 10 mg/kg of CSA or oil vehicle followed by the removal of a cremaster muscle. The feeding arteriole was isolated from the cremaster and mounted on micropipettes and pressurized to 70 mmHg in a superfused tissue bath. After an hour equilibration to develop spontaneous tone, a 1 cm segment of aorta was placed in the superfusion system upstream from the arteriole and Salmonella enteriditis endotoxin was added to the buffer at a concentration of 2.5 microg/mL (ET) or continued infusion of buffer alone. Internal diameters of cannulated arterioles were measured with videomicroscopy and videocalipers for an additional hour. RESULTS: Arterioles downstream from an aorta exposed to vehicle but not endotoxin developed 22.8 +/- 3.7% tone that remained unchanged over the following hour. Arterioles exposed to endotoxin started with 22.5 +/- 2.8% spontaneous tone and this fell over the following hour to 11.8 +/- 3.6%, P < 0.05. Pre-treatment of the rats with CSA tended to increase resting tone and completely prevented the loss of tone after endotoxin. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-treatment of the aortic segment with CSA resulted in the development of increased tone in the downstream arteriole and completely blocked the vasodilatory response to endotoxin. These results suggest that CSA or a similar compound may be useful in the treatment of septic shock.

Pursuing fellowship training in colorectal surgery: a candidate's perspective.

Colorectal surgery is a fulfilling profession that has become more difficult to match into. There are many factors that go into choosing a career in colorectal surgery. Having a mentor as a colorectal surgeon, performing research in colorectal surgery, and being involved with the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons are all important aspects in providing exposure to young surgeons in training and guiding them toward the field of colorectal surgery. Once the decision has been made, the application and interview process can be daunting. This article reviews salient points about the process I took in choosing colorectal surgery and the steps I took in applying and interviewing for my fellowship.