Patients' experiences undergoing cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand patients' experiences undergoing cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to COVID-19, many elective cancer surgeries were delayed creating a massive backlog of cases. Patients' experiences with surgical delays may inform healthcare systems' responses to the backlog of cases and guide preparations for future healthcare emergencies. METHODS: This was a qualitative description study. Patients undergoing general surgery for cancer at two university-affiliated hospitals between March 2020 and January 2021 were invited to one-to-one interviews. Patients were purposefully selected using quota sampling until interviews produced no new information (i.e., thematic saturation). Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide and analyzed according to inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included [mean age 64 ± 12.9; male (n = 10); surgical delay (n = 14); cancer sites: breast (n = 8), skin (n = 4), hepato-pancreato-biliary (n = 4), colorectal (n = 2), and gastro-esophageal (n = 2)]. When determining their willingness to undergo surgery, patients weighed the risk of COVID-19 infection against the urgency of their disease. Changes to the hospital environment (e.g., COVID-19 preventative measures) and deviations from expected treatment (e.g., alternative treatments, remote consultations, rescheduled care) caused diverse psychological responses, ranging from increased satisfaction to severe distress. Patients employed several coping strategies to mitigate distress, including eliciting reassurance from care providers, seeking information from unconventional sources, and reframing care interruptions. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in care during the pandemic elicited diverse psychological responses from patients undergoing cancer surgery. Coping was facilitated by consistent communication with providers, emphasizing the importance of patient-centered expectation setting as we prepare for the future within and beyond the pandemic.

Side-to-side duodeno-ileal magnetic compression anastomosis: design and feasibility of a novel device in a porcine model.

BACKGROUND: Minimally invasive metabolic/bariatric surgery (MBS) may be further advanced by magnetic compression anastomosis (MCA) technology. The study aimed to develop a magnet sized to create a patent duodeno-ileostomy (DI) and verify its effectiveness in a porcine model. METHODS: Developmental study phase: magnets with 4 different flange-offset dimensions were tested to identify a design that would successfully form a compression anastomosis. Verification phase: evaluation of the selected design's efficacy. In each 6-week phase (4 pigs/phase), one magnet was inserted laparoscopically in the jejunum, one placed gastroscopically in the duodenum. Magnets were aligned, gradually fused, formed an anastomosis, and then detached and were expelled. At necropsy, MCA sites and sutured enterotomy sites were collected and compared. RESULTS: Developmental phase: the linear BC42 magnet with a 2.3-mm flange offset design was selected. Verification phase: in 4 swine magnets were mated at the target location, confirmed radiographically. Mean time to magnet detachment 16.0 days (12-22), to expulsion 24.5 days (17-33). MCA was achieved in all animals at time of sacrifice. Animals gained a mean 9.5 kg (3.9-11.8). Specimens revealed patent anastomoses of ≥ 20 mm with smooth mucosa and minimal inflammation and fibrosis compared to sutured enterotomies. One pig underwent corrective surgery for a mesenteric hernia without sequelae. CONCLUSION: In a large-animal model, gross and histopathologic examination confirmed that the linear MCA device created a patent, well-vascularized, duodeno-ileal anastomosis. The novel MCA device may be appropriate for use in human MBS procedures.

Prescription and consumption of opioids after bariatric surgery: a multicenter prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: In the current opioid crisis, bariatric surgical patients are at increased risk of harms related to postoperative opioid overprescribing. This study aimed to assess the extent to which opioids prescribed at discharge after bariatric surgery are consumed by patients. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18yo) undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Preoperative assessments included demographics and patient-reported measures. Information regarding surgical and perioperative care interventions (including discharge prescriptions) was obtained from medical records. Self-reported opioid consumption was assessed weekly up to 30 days post-discharge. Number of opioid pills prescribed and consumed was compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to identify predictors of post-discharge opioid consumption. RESULTS: We analyzed 351 patients (mean age 44 ± 11 years, BMI 45 ± 8.0 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy, length of stay 1.6 ± 0.6 days). The quantity of opioids prescribed at discharge (median 15 pills [IQR 15-16], 112.5 morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) [IQR 80-112.5]) was significantly higher than patient-reported consumption (median 1 pill [IQR 0-5], 7.5 MMEs [IQR 0-37.5]) (p < 0.001). Overall, 37% of patients did not take any opioids post-discharge and 78.5% of the opioid pills prescribed were unused. Increased post-discharge opioid consumption was associated with male sex (IRR 1.54 [95%CI 1.14 to 2.07]), higher BMI (1.03 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.05]), preoperative opioid use (1.48 [95%CI 1.04 to 2.10]), current smoking (2.32 [95%CI 1.44 to 3.72]), higher PROMIS-29 depression score (1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.04]), anastomotic procedures (1.33 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.75]), and number of pills prescribed (1.04 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.06]). CONCLUSION: This study supports that most opioid pills prescribed to bariatric surgery patients at discharge are not consumed. Patient and procedure-related factors may predict opioid consumption. Individualized post-discharge analgesia strategies with minimal or no opioids may be feasible and should be further investigated in future research.

Predictors of post-discharge pain and satisfaction with pain management after laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pain management after bariatric surgery remains challenging given the risk for analgesia-related adverse events (e.g., opioid use disorder, marginal ulcers). Identifying modifiable factors associated with patient-reported pain outcomes may improve quality of care. We evaluated the extent to which patient and procedural factors predict 7-day post-discharge pain intensity, pain interference, and satisfaction with pain management after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery at two university-affiliated hospitals and one private clinic. Preoperative assessments included demographics, Pain Catastrophizing Scale (score range 0-52), Patient Activation Measure (low [< 55.1] vs. high [≥ 55.1]), pain expectation (0-10), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) anxiety and depression scales. At 7 days post-discharge, assessments included PROMIS-29 pain intensity (0-10) and pain interference scales (41.6-75.6), and satisfaction with pain management (high [10-9] vs. lower [8-0]). Linear and logistic regression were used to assess the association of pain outcomes with potential predictors. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-one patients were included (mean age = 44 ± 11 years, BMI = 45 ± 8 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy). At 7 days post-discharge, median (IQR) patient-reported pain intensity was 2.5 (1-5), pain interference was 55.6 (52.0-61.2), and 76% of patients reported high satisfaction with pain management. Pain intensity was predicted by preoperative anxiety (ß + 0.04 [95% CI + 0.01 to + 0.07]) and pain expectation (+ 0.15 [+ 0.05 to + 0.25]). Pain interference was predicted by preoperative anxiety (+ 0.22 [+ 0.11 to + 0.33]), pain expectation (+ 0.47 [+ 0.10 to + 0.84]), and age (- 0.09 [- 0.174 to - 0.003]). Lower satisfaction was predicted by low patient activation (OR 1.94 [1.05-3.58]), higher pain catastrophizing (1.03 [1.003-1.05]), 30-day complications (3.27 [1.14-9.38]), and age (0.97 [0.948-0.998]). CONCLUSION: Patient-related factors are important predictors of post-discharge pain outcomes after bariatric surgery. Our findings highlight the value of addressing educational, psychological, and coping strategies to improve postoperative pain outcomes.

Magnetic compression anastomosis gastrojejunostomy: feasibility and efficacy of a novel device in a swine model.

BACKGROUND: Means of addressing technical challenges in forming gastrojejunostomy (GJ) anastomoses and maintaining their patency are sought. OBJECTIVES: Evaluation of preclinical feasibility and healing efficacy of a novel linear magnetic compression anastomosis (MCA) device to form a patent GJ versus sutured jejunal enterotomy (JE) sites in swine. SETTING: Single-center veterinary testing facility. METHODS: Feasibility of 3 prototype sizes (4, 6, and 8 cm) of a metal MCA device (MCAD) to form a patent GJ was evaluated over 6 weeks. A distal magnet was laparoscopically inserted in the jejunum, a proximal magnet was placed gastroscopically in the stomach; magnets were aligned to gradually form an anastomosis, self-detached, and be expelled. At necropsy, MCAs were assessed for patency and compared with JE tissues to evaluate wound healing. RESULTS: MCADs aligned at the GJ location without complications. In 5/6 MCAD pairs, dislodgement occurred between 7 and 26 days; expulsion 13-31 days; 1 MCAD pair was retained in the stomach. At necropsy, all pigs were healthy, gaining a mean 15.0 kg. Anastomoses were not adequately patent in 2/4 pigs receiving the 4-cm or 6-cm MCADs because their linear length was too small. But, anastomoses of both pigs receiving the 8-cm MCADs maintained full patency. Minimal inflammation and fibrosis were seen in MCA specimens versus sutured enterotomies. CONCLUSIONS: A novel linear MCA device was feasible and effectively created a patent GJ anastomosis in swine with minimal inflammation and fibrosis. The MCAD may be appropriate for clinical evaluation.

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.

Improving Hemostasis in Sleeve Gastrectomy With Alternative Stapler.

BACKGROUND: Staple line bleeding can be a major intra-operative complication during laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, requiring reinforcing interventions that may diminish the integrity of the staple line and put patients at risk for postoperative hemorrhage or leak. To improve outcomes associated with surgery, surgeons may benefit from an alternative stapler that produces a drier staple line and requires less staple line manipulation. METHODS: Sixty consecutive laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy procedures were performed by three surgeons; 30 sleeves using the AEON™ Endostapler on THICK MODE and 30 using the Echelon Flex™ Powered Stapler with pulse technique. Stapler performance was measured by incidence and degree of staple line bleeding. Images of the first firing and fundus were taken with the laparoscope 10 seconds after the final firing. Images were evaluated by a third-party blinded evaluator and given a "bleeding score," a qualitative measure of intra-operative staple-line bleeding (1 = no bleeding to 5 = profuse bleeding). RESULTS: The AEON™ Endostapler demonstrated a lower mean (± standard error) "bleeding score" versus the Echelon Flex™ (2.1 ± 0.1 vs. 2.6 ± 0.1; p = 0.01). The AEON™ Endostapler had 15 cases (50%) with no bleeding at the fundus; the Echelon Flex™ had 7 cases (23%) with no bleeding at the fundus. The AEON™ Endostapler had 0 cases (0%) with profuse bleeding; the Echelon Flex™ had 2 cases (7%) with profuse bleeding. CONCLUSION: The AEON™ Endostapler is a significantly drier alternative to the Echelon Flex™ Powered Stapler, producing a much drier staple line and decreasing the need for other bleeding control methods.