Ureteral Stents Do Not Increase the Risk for Acute Kidney Injury After Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Ureteral stents are thought to prevent or help identify ureteral injuries. Studies suggesting that ureteral stents increase the risk of postoperative acute kidney injury show inconsistent conclusions. The large ureteral stenting volume at our institution provided a unique opportunity for granular analysis not previously reported. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether prophylactic ureteral stenting at colorectal surgery increases acute kidney injury. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of colorectal operations with prophylactic ureteral stents was compared to operations without stents. Adjusted analysis was performed with inverse probability treatment weighting. SETTINGS: Single institution enhanced recovery colorectal surgery service. PATIENTS: Prospective institutional database between July 1, 2018, and December 31, 2021. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was acute kidney injury, defined as increase in creatinine ≥0. 3 mg/dL (definition 1) and 1.5-fold increase in creatinine (definition 2) within 48 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: There were 410 patients in the study population: 310 patients in the stent group and 100 in the no-stent group. There were 8 operative ureteral injuries: 4 (1.29%) in the stent group and 4 (4.0%) in the no-stent group ( p = 0.103). Unadjusted analysis revealed no significant difference in acute kidney injury between groups. After adjustment, there was still no significant difference in acute kidney injury between groups when defined as definition 1 (no-stent 23.76% vs stent 26.19%, p = 0.745) and as definition 2 (no-stent 15.86% vs stent 14.8%, p = 0.867). Subgroup analysis showed that lighted stents were associated with significantly more acute kidney injury than no-stent patients when defined as definition 1 ( p = 0.017) but not when defined as definition 2 ( p = 0.311). LIMITATIONS: Single-institution results may not be generalizable. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic ureteral stenting does not increase the risk of acute kidney injury for patients undergoing enhanced recovery colorectal surgery, although caution and further study may be warranted for lighted stents. Studies further examining contrasting roles of ureter stenting and imaging in open and minimally invasive colorectal surgery are warranted. See Video Abstract. LOS STENTS URETERALES NO AUMENTAN EL RIESGO DE LESIN RENAL AGUDA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA COLORECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Se cree que los stents ureterales previenen o ayudan a identificar las lesiones ureterales. Los estudios que sugieren que los stents ureterales aumentan el riesgo de lesión renal aguda post operatoria muestran conclusiones contradictorias. El gran volumen de endoprótesis ureterales en nuestra institución brindó una oportunidad única para el análisis granular que no se informó anteriormente.OBJETIVO:Determinar si la colocación de stent ureteral profiláctico en cirugía colorrectal aumenta el daño renal agudo.DISEÑO:El análisis retrospectivo de operaciones colorrectales con stents ureterales profilácticos se comparó con operaciones sin stents. El análisis ajustado se realizó con ponderación de tratamiento de probabilidad inversa.AJUSTES:Cirugía colorrectal de recuperación mejorada de una sola instituciónPACIENTES:Base de datos institucional prospectiva entre el 01/07/2018 y el 31/12/2021.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:El resultado primario fue la lesión renal aguda definida como un aumento en la creatinina ≥ 0,3 mg/dL (Definición n.° 1) y un aumento de 1,5 veces en la creatinina (Definición n.° 2) dentro de las 48 horas posteriores a la operación.RESULTADOS:Hubo 410 pacientes en la población de estudio: 310 pacientes en el grupo Stent y 100 en el grupo No-Stent. Hubo 8 lesiones ureterales operatorias, 4 (1,29%) en el grupo Stent y 4 (4,0%) en el grupo No-Stent (p = 0,103). El análisis no ajustado no reveló diferencias significativas en la lesión renal aguda entre los grupos. Después del ajuste, todavía no hubo una diferencia significativa en la lesión renal aguda entre los grupos cuando se definió como Definición n.º 1 (sin stent 23,76 % frente a stent 26,19 %, p = 0,745) y por definición n.º 2 (sin stent 15,86 % frente a stent 14,8 %, p = 0,867). El análisis de sub grupos mostró que los stents iluminados se asociaron con una lesión renal aguda significativamente mayor que los pacientes sin stent cuando se definieron como Definición n.º 1 (p = 0,017), pero no cuando se los definió como Definición n.º 2 (p = 0,311).LIMITACIONES:Los resultados de una sola institución pueden no ser generalizables.CONCLUSIÓN:La colocación profiláctica de endoprótesis ureterales no aumenta el riesgo de lesión renal aguda en pacientes que se someten a cirugía colorrectal de recuperación mejorada, aunque es posible que se requiera precaución y estudios adicionales para las endoprótesis iluminadas. Se justifican estudios que examinen más a fondo las funciones contrastantes de la colocación de stents de uréter y las imágenes en la cirugía colorrectal abierta y mínimamente invasiva. (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Postoperative Oral Rehydration and Regimented Follow-up Decrease Readmissions After Colorectal Surgery That Includes Ileostomies.

BACKGROUND: Ileostomies constitute 15% to 43% of readmissions after colorectal surgery, often due to dehydration and acute kidney injury. Prior institutional interventions decreased readmissions but not among patients who underwent new ileostomies. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate readmissions among patients who underwent new ileostomies after postoperative oral rehydration solution and standardized clinic visits. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of prospective database. SETTINGS: Enhanced recovery colorectal surgery service. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent new ileostomy before and after intervention. INTERVENTIONS: Postoperative oral rehydration solution and postdischarge clinic visits with review of inputs/outputs, antimotility and appliance needs, and trained nurse reeducation 4 to 7 days after discharge, 30 days postoperatively, and every 1 to 2 weeks thereafter as needed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Readmission rate due to dehydration/acute kidney injury (primary), emergency department visits, and readmission rates overall and for specific diagnoses. Analysis used univariate and weighted techniques. RESULTS: A total of 312 patients (199 preintervention; 113 postintervention) were included, with a mean age of 59.0 years. Patients were predominantly White (94.9%) and evenly split between men and women. The most common diagnosis was diverticulitis (43.3%). The most common procedure was high anterior resection (38.8%), followed by low anterior resection (16.35%). Patient and procedure characteristics were well matched between groups. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that readmission rate due to dehydration/acute kidney injury significantly decreased between pre- and postintervention study groups (45.7% vs 16.5%, p = 0.039). Emergency department visits due to dehydration/acute kidney injury (12.0% vs 1.7%, p < 0.001) and readmissions from all causes (24.33% vs 10.6%, p = 0.005) also significantly decreased. Other complications were not significantly different between groups. Average stoma output 24 hours before (776 vs 625 mL, p = 0.005) and after (993 vs 890 mL, p = 0.025) discharge was significantly decreased in the postintervention group. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: An oral rehydration solution and frequent standardized postdischarge visits led by trained nursing staff decreased readmissions and emergency department visits among patients who underwent new ileostomies after colorectal surgery. See Video Abstract . LA REHIDRATACIN ORAL POSOPERATORIA Y EL SEGUIMIENTO REGLAMENTADO REDUCEN LOS REINGRESOS EN PACIENTES DE CIRUGA COLORRECTAL CON ILEOSTOMAS: ANTECEDENTES:Las ileostomías constituyen del 15 al 43% de los reingresos después de la cirugía colorrectal, a menudo debido a la deshidratación y la lesión renal aguda. Las intervenciones institucionales previas redujeron los reingresos, pero no entre los pacientes con nuevas ileostomías.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los reingresos entre pacientes con nuevas ileostomías después del uso de solución de rehidratación oral postoperatoria y visitas clínicas estandarizadas.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de base de datos prospectiva.AJUSTES:Servicio de cirugía colorrectal de recuperación mejorada.PACIENTES:Pacientes con ileostomía nueva antes y después de la intervención.INTERVENCIÓN(ES):Solución de rehidratación oral posoperatoria y visitas clínicas posteriores al alta con revisión de entradas/salidas, antimotilidad y necesidades de aparatos, y reeducación de enfermeras capacitadas 4-7 días después del alta, 30 días después de la operación y cada 1-2 semanas después, según sea necesario.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tasa de readmisión debido a deshidratación/lesión renal aguda (primaria), tasa de urgencias y de readmisión en general y para diagnósticos específicos. El análisis utilizó técnicas univariadas y ponderadas.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 312 pacientes (199 preintervención; 113 postintervención), con una edad media de 59,0 años. Los pacientes eran predominantemente blancos (94,9%) y se dividieron equitativamente entre hombres y mujeres. El diagnóstico más frecuente fue diverticulitis (43,3%). El procedimiento más común fue la resección anterior alta (38,8 %) seguida de la resección anterior baja (16,35 %). Las características del paciente y del procedimiento coincidieron bien entre los grupos. El análisis multivariante demostró que la tasa de reingreso debido a deshidratación/lesión renal aguda disminuyó significativamente entre los grupos de estudio antes y después de la intervención (45,7 % frente a 16,5 %, p = 0,039). Las visitas a urgencias por deshidratación/insuficiencia renal aguda (12,0 % frente a 1,7 %, p < 0,001) y los reingresos por todas las causas (24,33 % frente a 10,6 %, p = 0,005) también disminuyeron significativamente. Otras complicaciones no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos. El gasto medio del estoma 24 horas antes (776 ml frente a 625 ml, p = 0,005) y después (993 ml frente a 890 ml, p = 0,025) del alta disminuyó significativamente en el grupo posterior a la intervención.LIMITACIONES:Estudio retrospectivo de centro único.CONCLUSIONES:Una solución de rehidratación oral y frecuentes visitas estandarizadas posteriores al alta dirigidas por personal de enfermería capacitado redujeron los reingresos y las visitas al servicio de urgencias entre los pacientes con nuevas ileostomías después de la cirugía colorrectal. ( Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Operative trends following the adoption of nonoperative management of rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Differentiating clinical near-complete and complete responses (cCR) after neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is challenging in rectal cancer patients. We hypothesized that magnetic resonance imaging staging limitations for low rectal cancers may increase the proportion of abdominoperineal resection (APR) with permanent colostomy for those without a cCR. METHODS: Single institution retrospective analysis of rectal cancer cases before and after adoption of nonoperative "watch and wait" (W&W) pathway. APR as a percentage of rectal resections was the primary outcome. RESULTS: There were 76 total mesorectal excisions (TME) in the pre-W&W group and 98 in the post-W&W group. NT was significantly more common in the post-W&W group. There was no significant difference in the APR primary outcome (pre-W&W APR 33.3% vs. post-W&W APR 26.5%, p = 0.482). APR patients had fewer complete TME grades (69.2% vs. 46.2%) and more pathologic complete responses (0% vs. 26.9%) in the post-W&W period. The cCR rate for patients with nonoperative management was 51.4% (n = 37) and 13.5% (n = 5) had regrowths, all of whom underwent salvage surgery. CONCLUSION: APR for those without a cCR to NT has not increased in the nonoperative management era. Balancing the pathologic complete response rate may require restaging some patients with clinical near-complete responses.

Early discharge after enhanced recovery rectal resection does not increase emergency department visits and readmissions: a single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: Same-day discharge after colectomy in enhanced recovery pathways has been shown to be feasible. It is not clear how early patients with rectal resections may be safely discharged. The study aim was to determine if patients discharged ≤ 3 days after rectal resections are associated with increased rates of emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of enhanced recovery low anterior resection, abdominoperineal resection, and proctocolectomy patients in a prospectively maintained single institution colorectal surgery database from 01/01/2018 to 07/15/2022. Clinic visits were scheduled within 4-7 days and at 30 days after discharge, and every 1-2 weeks for stoma patients until no longer needed. Logistic regression models were used to analyze the association of discharge on postoperative days (POD)-1-3, POD-4-5, and POD ≥ 6 days with incidence of ED visits and readmissions. RESULTS: A total of 118 patients met inclusion criteria, 76 with stomas. Median postoperative length of stay was 5 [IQR 6.5] days. Mean age was 58.6 years; 59.3% were ASA-3; and 69.5% had a minimally invasive surgical approach. ED visits were not significantly different between discharge-day groups (p = 0.096). No patients were discharged same-day, one without a stoma was discharged on POD-1, ten patients (2 with stomas) on POD-2, and twenty-four patients (13 with stomas) on POD-3. ED visits were lowest for the POD-1-3 group (14.3%) but not significantly different than later discharge groups (p = 0.166). Readmission rate was also lowest for the POD-1-3 group (11.4%) and also not significantly different than later discharge groups (p = 0.261) and this was confirmed with logistic regression. Complication rate was lowest in the POD-1-3 group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Early discharge after enhanced recovery partial or complete proctectomy is not associated with increased ED visits and readmissions. Follow up studies should identify post-discharge resources that allow safe early discharge and that may be standardized and generalizable.

Lack of Complete Pretreatment Staging Is Associated With Omission of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Rectal Cancer: A Statewide Study.

BACKGROUND: Standardized local staging and neoadjuvant therapy are rectal cancer management quality measures supported by the Commission on Cancer and National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer for the management of rectal cancer. Previous studies suggested that up to 25% of patients with stage II/III rectal cancer patients do not receive neoadjuvant therapy. We hypothesized that failure to receive neoadjuvant therapy may be caused by failure to properly stage patients before surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine whether lack of local rectal cancer staging is associated with underutilization of neoadjuvant therapy and to determine risk factors for omission of neoadjuvant therapy. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. Bivariate and multivariable analyses were performed on patient, tumor, and 30-day outcome factors associated with neoadjuvant therapy and staging. SETTINGS: hospitals participated in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Colorectal Cancer Project from January 2014 to December 2019. PATIENTS: Elective, clinical stage II/III, mid-to-low rectal cancer resections. Patients with upper rectal cancer were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Percentage of patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy. RESULTS: The final cohort included 350 patients with clinical stage II/III mid or low rectal cancer-80.9% of patients who had received neoadjuvant therapy and 83.2% of patients who had MRI and/or endoscopic ultrasound. A significant association was found between receiving neoadjuvant therapy and MRI/endorectal ultrasound staging ( p < 0.0001). Eighty-seven percent of patients who had MRI/endorectal ultrasound received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy; 49% of patients who did not have MRI/endorectal ultrasound staging received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Multivariate analysis revealed that risk factors for the omission of neoadjuvant therapy were older age and incomplete staging. LIMITATIONS: Observational study with the possibility of unmeasured confounding variables. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant therapy is underused in patients with stage II/III rectal cancer. Omission of pretreatment staging with MRI/endorectal ultrasound is associated with omission of neoadjuvant therapy. These data suggest the need for regional and national quality improvement strategies to standardize the multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B923 . LA FALTA DE ESTADIFICACIN COMPLETA PREVIA AL TRATAMIENTO SE ASOCIA CON LA OMISIN DE LA TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO UN ESTUDIO ESTATAL: ANTECEDENTES: La estadificación local estandarizada y la terapia neoadyuvante son medidas de calidad de la Comisión sobre el Cáncer y el Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer de Recto para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. Estudios previos sugirieron que hasta el 25% de los pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio II/III no reciben terapia neoadyuvante. Planteamos la hipótesis de que la falla en recibir la terapia neoadyuvante puede deberse a la falla en la estadificación adecuada de los pacientes antes de la cirugía.OBJETIVO: El propósito de este estudio es determinar si la falta de estadificación local del cáncer de recto está asociada con la infrautilización de la terapia neoadyuvante y determinar los factores de riesgo para la omisión de la terapia neoadyuvante.DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. Se realizaron análisis bivariados y multivariados sobre el paciente, el tumor y los factores de resultado a los 30 días asociados con la terapia neoadyuvante y la estadificación.AJUSTE: Un total de 31 hospitales que participaron en el Proyecto Quirugico Colaborativo de Cáncer Colorrectal de Calidad de Michigan desde enero de 2014 hasta diciembre de 2019.PACIENTES: Resecciones electivas, en estadio clínico II/III, de cáncer de recto medio a bajo. Se excluyeron los pacientes con cáncer de recto superior.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL: Porcentaje de pacientes que reciben terapia neoadyuvante. Porcentaje de pacientes que reciben terapia neoadyuvante.RESULTADOS: La cohorte final fue de 350 casos con cáncer de recto medio o bajo en estadio clínico II/III. El 80,9% tenía terapia neoadyuvante y el 83,2%, resonancia magnética y/o ultrasonido endoscópico. Hubo una asociación significativa entre recibir terapia neoadyuvante y la estadificación MRI/ERUS ( p < 0,0001). El 87% de los pacientes a los que se les realizaron imágenes con MRI/ERUS recibieron NT, mientras que el 49% de los pacientes a los que no se les realizó la estadificación con MRI/ERUS tuvieron NT. El análisis multivariante reveló que los factores de riesgo para la omisión de la terapia neoadyuvante fueron la edad avanzada y la estadificación incompleta.LIMITACIONES: Estudio observacional con posibilidad de confusión de variables no medidas.CONCLUSIONES: La terapia neoadyuvante está infrautilizada en pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio II/III. La omisión de la estadificación previa al tratamiento con MRI/ERUS se asocia con la omisión de la terapia neoadyuvante. Estos datos sugieren la necesidad de estrategias regionales y nacionales de mejora de la calidad para estandarizar el manejo multidisciplinario del cáncer de recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B923 . (Traducción-Dr Yolanda Colorado ).

Comparison of surgeon and pathologist total mesorectal excision grade after rectal cancer resection: A single institution analysis.

BACKGROUND: A Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Colorectal Cancer Project initiative sought to increase adoption of surgeon total mesorectal excision (TME) grading through standardized education and synoptic operative reporting. Our study aim was to assess initiative impact and level of agreement between surgeon and pathologist-determined TME grades. METHODS: This is a retrospective comparison of surgeon and pathologist TME grades before and after initiative implementation using a prospectively maintained enhanced recovery colorectal surgery database. RESULTS: There were 112 TMEs before, and 53 TMEs following initiative implementation. There was a significant increase in surgeon TME-grade reporting in the postinitiative period (25.0% pre- vs. 81.1% post-, p < 0.001). Pathologist TME-grade reporting was high in both time periods and there was no significant change (91.1% pre- vs. 88.7% post-, p = 0.84). Surgeon and pathologist agreement was 59.3% in the preinitiative period (Κ "minimal"   0.356) and 65.0% in the postinitiative period (Κ "moderate" = 0.605, p = 0.827). There was no significant association between clinical T-stage and surgeon or pathologist TME grade. CONCLUSION: Surgeon TME grading improves with education and synoptic operative reporting. There is only moderate agreement between surgeon and pathologist, a finding that requires further study. Organized regional initiatives are effective at implementing rectal cancer management quality improvement.

Alvimopan is associated with favorable outcomes in open and minimally invasive colorectal surgery: a regional database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Alvimopan is a µ-opioid receptor antagonist associated with shorter time to gastrointestinal recovery in patients having open colorectal surgery. Data demonstrating the benefit of perioperative alvimopan for the minimally invasive surgical approach are inconsistent. The aim of this study is to determine colorectal surgery groups that benefit from perioperative alvimopan. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort analysis of colorectal surgery patients who had, and patients who did not have, perioperative alvimopan in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative regional risk-adjusted database from 2018 through 2021. Main outcome measures were postoperative length of hospital stay, time to return of bowel function, and postoperative ileus. RESULTS: There were 10,010 patients (30.3% open, 40.5% laparoscopic, 12.7% hand-assist laparoscopic, 43.5% robotic) who met inclusion criteria-4919 received alvimopan in the perioperative period and 5091 did not. When compared to those not receiving alvimopan, unadjusted outcomes showed that the alvimopan group had significantly shorter postoperative length of stay (4.75 days vs 5.5 days, p < 0.001), shorter time to return of bowel function (1.61 days vs 2.01 days, p < 0.001) and less postoperative ileus (5.45% vs 7.94%, p < 0.001). After adjustment, regression models confirmed that alvimopan was associated with an 9.6% reduction in hospital length of stay (p < 0.001), a 14.9% shorter time to return of bowel function (p < 0.001), and a 42.1% reduction in postoperative ileus (p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis showed significant benefit of alvimopan for all three outcomes in patients having the minimally invasive approach. CONCLUSIONS: Alvimopan is associated with shorter hospital length of stay, shorter time to return of bowel function, and decreased postoperative ileus when administered to patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Benefit is not limited to the open approach and includes minimally invasive laparoscopic and robotic colorectal procedures.

Health-care expenditures are less for minimally invasive than open colectomy for colon cancer: A US commercial claims database analysis.

BACKGROUND: Most studies comparing surgical platforms focus on short-term outcomes. In this study, we compare the expanding societal penetration of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) with open colectomy by assessing payer and patient expenditures up to one year for patients undergoing surgery for colon cancer. METHODS: We analyzed the IBM MarketScan Database for patients who underwent left or right colectomy for colon cancer between 2013 and 2020. Outcomes included perioperative complications and total health-care expenditures up to 1 year following colectomy. We compared results for patients who had open colectomy (OS) to those with MIS operations. Subgroup analyses were performed for adjuvant chemotherapy (AC+) versus no adjuvant chemotherapy (AC-) groups and for laparoscopic (LS) versus robotic (RS) approaches. RESULTS: Of 7,063 patients, 4,417 cases did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy (OS: 20.1%, LS: 67.1%, RS: 12.7%) and 2646 cases had adjuvant chemotherapy (OS: 28.4%, LS: 58.7%, RS: 12.9%) after discharge. MIS colectomy was associated with lower mean expenditure at index surgery and post-discharge periods for AC- patients (index surgery: $34,588 vs $36,975; 365-day post-discharge $20,051 vs $24,309) and for AC+ patients (index surgery: $37,884 vs $42,160; 365-day post-discharge $103,341vs $135,113; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). LS had similar index surgery expenditures but significantly higher expenditures at post-discharge 30 days (AC-: $2,834 vs $2276, p = 0.005; AC+: $9100 vs $7698, p = 0.020) than RS. The overall complication rate was significantly lower in the MIS group than the open group for AC- patients (20.5% vs 31.2%) and AC+ patients (22.6% vs 39.1%, both p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MIS colectomy is associated with better value at lower expenditure than open colectomy for colon cancer at the index operation and up to one year after surgery. RS expenditure is less than LS in the first 30 postoperative days regardless of chemotherapy status and may extend to 1 year for AC- patients.

Post-discharge Opioid Consumption After Minimally Invasive and Open Colectomy: Does Operative Approach Matter?

OBJECTIVE: To determine if patients consume less opioid after minimally invasive colectomy compared to open colectomy. BACKGROUND: Opioids are overprescribed after surgery, and surgeons are under increasing pressure to reduce postoperative opioid prescribing. In colorectal surgery, minimally invasive approaches are partly justified by reduced inpatient opioid use, but there are no studies comparing post-discharge opioid consumption between minimally invasive and open colectomy. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of adult patients undergoing colectomy from January 2017 to May 2018 in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative database. After postoperative day 30, patients were contacted by phone or email and asked to report post-discharge opioid consumption. The main outcome measure was post-discharge opioid consumption, and the primary predictor was surgical approach (minimally invasive vs open). Zero-inflated negative binomial regression analysis was used to test for an association between surgical approach and opioid consumption. RESULTS: We identified 562 patients who underwent minimally invasive or open colectomy from 43 hospitals. After multivariable adjustment, no significant difference was demonstrated in opioid consumption (P = 0.54) or the likelihood of using no opioids (P = 0.39) between patients undergoing minimally versus open colectomy. Larger prescriptions were associated with more opioid use and a lower likelihood of using no opioids. Age greater than 65 and diagnosis of cancer/adenoma were associated with less opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing minimally invasive and open colectomy consume similar amounts of opioid after discharge. The size of the postoperative prescription, patient age, and diagnosis are more important in determining opioid use. Understanding factors influencing postoperative opioid requirements may allow surgeons to better tailor prescriptions to patient needs.

Acute Colonic Pseudo-Obstruction.

CASE SUMMARY: A 33-year-old man with a history of chronic alcohol use, generalized anxiety disorder, and hypertension presented to the emergency department after a syncopal event. He was admitted to the medical intensive care unit for alcohol withdrawal, requiring intubation and sedation. On hospital day 7, abdominal x-ray image demonstrated a dilated cecum to 12 cm, transverse colon dilation to 7 cm, and decompressed distal colon ( Fig. 1 ). CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis confirmed dilation of the cecum and ascending and transverse colons ( Fig. 2 ). Colonoscopy showed no evidence of distal obstruction, but colonic distension persisted, and he subsequently underwent cecal decompression with an open "blow-hole" cecostomy fully matured at skin level via a small right lower quadrant incision. The nasogastric tube was removed on postoperative day 2, and his diet was slowly advanced. Abdominal x-ray image on postoperative day 5 demonstrated no colonic dilation. He was discharged home on postoperative day 7. The patient re-presented to the hospital 3 months later with cecostomy prolapse. He underwent cecostomy takedown with ileocecectomy via circumstomal incision. He was discharged home on postoperative day 2.

A Single-Institution Analysis of Targeted Colorectal Surgery Enhanced Recovery Pathway Strategies That Decrease Readmissions.

BACKGROUND: Decreasing readmissions is an important quality improvement strategy. Targeted interventions that effectively decrease readmissions have not been fully investigated and standardized. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of interventions designed to decrease readmissions after colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This was a retrospective comparison of patients before and after the implementation of interventions. SETTING: This study was conducted at a single institution dedicated enhanced recovery pathway colorectal surgery service. PATIENTS: The study group received quality review interventions that were designed to decrease readmissions: preadmission class upgrades, a mobile phone app, a pharmacist-led pain management strategy, and an early postdischarge clinic. The control group was composed of enhanced recovery patients before the interventions. Propensity score weighting was used to adjust patient characteristics and predictors for imbalances. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was 30-day readmissions. Secondary outcomes included emergency department visits. RESULTS: There were 1052 patients in the preintervention group and 668 patients in the postintervention group. After propensity score weighting, the postintervention cohort had a significantly lower readmission rate (9.98% vs 17.82%, p < 0.001) and emergency department visit rate (14.58% vs 23.15%, p < 0.001) than the preintervention group, and surgical site infection type I/II was significantly decreased as a readmission diagnosis (9.46% vs 2.43%, p = 0.043). Median time to readmission was 6 (interquartile 3-11) days in the preintervention group and 8 (3-17) days in the postintervention group (p = 0.21). Ileus, acute kidney injury, and surgical site infection type III were common reasons for readmissions and emergency department visits. LIMITATIONS: A single-institution study may not be generalizable. CONCLUSION: Readmission bundles composed of targeted interventions are associated with a decrease in readmissions and emergency department visits after enhanced recovery colorectal surgery. Bundle composition may be institution dependent. Further study and refinement of bundle components are required as next-step quality metric improvements. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B849. ANLISIS EN UNA SOLA INSTITUCIN DE LAS CIRUGAS COLORECTALES CON VAS DE RECUPERACIN DIRIGIDA AUMENTADA QUE REDUCEN LOS REINGRESOS: ANTECEDENTES:La reducción de los reingresos es una importante estrategia de mejora de la calidad. Las intervenciones dirigidas que reducen eficazmente los reingresos no se han investigado ni estandarizado por completo.OBJETIVO:El propósito de este estudio fue evaluar la efectividad de las intervenciones diseñadas para disminuir los reingresos después de la cirugía colorrectal.DISEÑO:Comparación retrospectiva de pacientes antes y después de la implementación de las intervenciones.ESCENARIO:Una sola institución dedicada al Servicio de cirugía colorrectal con vías de recuperación dirigida aumentadaPACIENTES:El grupo de estudio recibió intervenciones de revisión de calidad que fueron diseñadas para disminuir los reingresos: actualizaciones de clases previas a la admisión, una aplicación para teléfono móvil, una estrategia de manejo del dolor dirigida por farmacéuticos y alta temprana de la clínica. El grupo de control estaba compuesto por pacientes con recuperación mejorada antes de las intervenciones. Se utilizó la ponderación del puntaje de propensión para ajustar las características del paciente y los predictores de los desequilibrios.PARÁMETRO DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:El resultado primario fueron los reingresos a los 30 días. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron visitas al servicio de urgencias.RESULTADOS:Hubo 1052 pacientes en el grupo de preintervención y 668 pacientes en el grupo de posintervención. Después de la ponderación del puntaje de propensión, la cohorte posterior a la intervención tuvo una tasa de reingreso significativamente menor (9,98% frente a 17,82%, p <0,001) y una tasa de visitas al servicio de urgencias (14,58% frente a 23,15%, p <0,001) que el grupo de preintervención y la infección del sitio quirúrgico tipo I / II se redujo significativamente como diagnóstico de reingreso (9,46% frente a 2,43%, p = 0,043). La mediana de tiempo hasta la readmisión fue de 6 [IQR 3, 11] días en el grupo de preintervención y de 8 [3, 17] días en el grupo de posintervención (p = 0,21). El íleo, la lesión renal aguda y la infección del sitio quirúrgico tipo III fueron motivos frecuentes de reingresos y visitas al servicio de urgencias.LIMITACIONES:El estudio de una sola institución puede no ser generalizable.CONCLUSIÓNES:Los paquetes de readmisión compuestos por intervenciones dirigidas se asocian con una disminución en las readmisiones y las visitas al departamento de emergencias después de una cirugía colorrectal con vías de recuperación dirigida aumentada. La composición del paquete puede depender de la institución. Se requieren más estudios y refinamientos de los componentes del paquete como siguiente paso de mejora de la métrica de calidad. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B849. (Traducción-Dr Yolanda Colorado).

The impact of obesity and morbid obesity on urgent/emergency colorectal resections: a regional database analysis.

BACKGROUND: The obesity rate is projected to reach 50% by 2030. Obesity may be modifiable prior to elective colorectal surgery, but there is no opportunity for weight loss when patients present for urgent/emergency operations. The impact of obesity focused on urgent/emergent colorectal operations has not been fully characterized. The study aim was to determine outcomes of obese patients who undergo urgent/emergency colorectal surgery and differences when compared with elective outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 30-day outcomes for normal (BMI 18.5-25), obese (BMI 30-39.9), and morbidly obese (BMI > 40) patients in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative between 1/1/2009 and 12/31/2018. Propensity score weighting was used to derive adjusted rates for overall morbidity, mortality, and specific complications. Primary outcome was postoperative complications (any morbidity). RESULTS: The study included 5268 urgent/emergency and 10,414 elective colorectal surgery patients. Postoperative complications were significantly more common in morbidly obese and obese than the normal BMI group for both urgent/emergency (morbidly obese 42.76% vs 33.75%, p = 0.003; obese 36.46% vs 33.75%, p = 0.043) and elective (morbidly obese 18.17% vs 13.36%, p = 0.004; obese 15.45% vs 13.36%, p = 0.011) operations. Surgical site infections are were significantly more common in morbidly obese and obese BMI groups as compared to normal BMI for both urgent/emergency and elective cases. Mortality was significantly higher in the morbidly obese (14.93% vs 11.44%, p = 0.013) but not obese BMI groups as compared to the normal BMI group for urgent/emergency cases. Mortality for all groups undergoing elective operations was < 1% and with no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Morbid obesity and obesity are associated with complications that are largely driven by surgical site infections after both urgent/emergency and elective colorectal surgery. Obesity is a risk factor difficult to modify prior to urgent/emergency surgery. Managing complications related to obesity after colorectal surgery will be a continued challenge with projected increasing obesity rates.

Comparison of health-care utilization and expenditures for minimally invasive vs. open colectomy for benign disease.

BACKGROUND: Adoption of minimally invasive approaches continues to increase, and there is a need to reassess outcomes and cost. We aimed to compare open versus minimally invasive colectomy short- and long-term health-care utilization and payer/patient expenditures for benign disease. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of IBM® MarketScan® Database patients who underwent left or right colectomy for benign disease between 2013 and 2018. Outcomes included total health-care expenditures, resource utilization, and direct workdays lost up to 365 days following colectomy. The open surgical approach (OS) was compared to minimally invasive colectomy (MIS) with subgroup analysis of laparoscopic (LS) and robotic (RS) approaches using inverse probability of treatment weighting. RESULTS: Of 10,439 patients, 2531 (24.3%) had open, 6826 (65.4%) had laparoscopic, and 1082 (10.3%) had robotic colectomy. MIS patients had shorter length of stay (LOS; mean difference, - 1.71, p < 0.001) and lower average total expenditures (mean difference, - $2378, p < 0.001) compared with open patients during the index hospitalization. At 1 year, MIS patients had lower readmission rates, and fewer mean emergency and outpatient department visits than open patients, translating into additional savings of $5759 and 2.22 fewer days missed from work for health-care visits over the 365-day post-discharge period. Within MIS, RS patients had shorter LOS (mean difference, - 0.60, p < 0.001) and lower conversion-to-open rates (odds ratio, 0.31 p < 0.001) during the index hospitalization, and lower hospital outpatient visits (mean difference, - 0.31, p = 0.001) at 365 days than LS. CONCLUSION: MIS colectomy is associated with lower mean health-care expenditures and less resource utilization compared to the open approach for benign disease at index operation and 365-days post-discharge. Health-care expenditures for LS and RS are similar but shorter mean LOS and lower conversion-to-open surgery rates were observed at index operation for the RS approach.

A national database propensity score-matched comparison of minimally invasive and open colectomy for long-term opioid use.

BACKGROUND: Opioid dependence is a public health crisis and surgery is a risk factor for long-term opioid use. Though minimally invasive surgery (MIS) is associated with less perioperative pain, demonstrating an association with less long-term opioid use would be another reason to justify adoption of minimally invasive techniques. We compared the rates for long-term opioid prescriptions among patients in a large national database who underwent minimally invasive and open colectomy. METHODS: Using the MarketScan Database, we retrospectively analyzed patients undergoing colon resection for benign and malignant diseases between 2013 and 2017. Among opioid-naïve patients who had ≥ 1 opioid prescriptions filled perioperatively (30 days before surgery to 14 days after discharge), propensity score matching was applied for group comparisons [open (OS) versus MIS, and laparoscopic (LS) versus robotic-assisted surgery (RS)]. The primary outcome was long-term opioid use defined as the proportion of patients with ≥ 1 long-term opioid prescriptions filled 90-180 days after discharge. Risks factors for long-term opioid use were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: Among the 5413 matched pairs in the MIS versus OS cohorts, MIS significantly reduced long-term opioid use of 'any opioids' (13.3% vs. 20.9%), schedule II/III opioids (11.7% vs. 19.2%), and high-dose opioids (4.3% vs. 7.7%; all p < 0.001). Among the 1195 matched pairs in the RS versus LS cohorts, RS was associated with less high-dose opioids (2.1% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.015) 90-180 days after discharge. Other risk factors for long-term opioid use included younger age, benign indications, tobacco use, mental health conditions, and > 6 Charlson comorbidities. CONCLUSION: Minimally invasive colectomy is associated with a significant reduction in long-term opioid use when compared to OS. Robotic-assisted colectomy was associated with less high-dose opioids compared to LS. Increasing adoption of minimally invasive surgery for colectomy and including RS, where appropriate, may decrease long-term opioid use.

Intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomosis for robotic-assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy: short-term outcomes of a multi-center prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies to date show contrasting conclusions when comparing intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses for minimally invasive right colectomy. Large multi-center prospective studies comparing perioperative outcomes between these two techniques are needed. The purpose of this study was to compare intracorporeal and extracorporeal anastomoses outcomes for robotic assisted and laparoscopic right colectomy. METHODS: Multi-center, prospective, observational study of patients with malignant or benign disease scheduled for laparoscopic or robotic-assisted right colectomy. Outcomes included conversion rate, gastrointestinal recovery, and complication rates. RESULTS: There were 280 patients: 156 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) group and 124 in the robotic assisted and laparoscopic extracorporeal anastomosis (EA) group. The EA group was older (mean age 67 vs. 65 years, p = 0.05) and had fewer white (81% vs. 90%, p = 0.05) and Hispanic (2% vs. 12%, p = 0.003) patients. The EA group had more patients with comorbidities (82% vs. 72%, p = 0.04) while there was no significant difference in individual comorbidities between groups. IA was associated with fewer conversions to open and hand-assisted laparoscopic approaches (p = 0.007), shorter extraction site incision length (4.9 vs. 6.2 cm; p ≤ 0.0001), and longer operative time (156.9 vs. 118.2 min). Postoperatively, patients with IA had shorter time to first flatus, (1.5 vs. 1.8 days; p ≤ 0.0001), time to first bowel movement (1.6 vs. 2.0 days; p = 0.0005), time to resume soft/regular diet (29.0 vs. 37.5 h; p = 0.0014), and shorter length of hospital stay (median, 3 vs. 4 days; p ≤ 0.0001). Postoperative complication rates were comparable between groups. CONCLUSION: In this prospective, multi-center study of minimally invasive right colectomy across 20 institutions, IA was associated with significant improvements in conversion rates, return of bowel function, and shorter hospital stay, as well as significantly longer operative times compared to EA. These data validate current efforts to increase training and adoption of the IA technique for minimally invasive right colectomy.

Postoperative Pain After Enhanced Recovery Pathway Robotic Colon and Rectal Surgery: Does Specimen Extraction Site Matter?

BACKGROUND: The current opioid crisis has motivated surgeons to critically evaluate ways to balance postoperative pain while decreasing opioid use and thereby reducing opioids available for community diversion. The longest incision for robotic colorectal surgery is the specimen extraction site incision. Intracorporeal techniques allow specimen extraction to be at any location. OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to determine whether the Pfannenstiel location is associated with less pain and opioid use than other abdominal wall specimen extraction sites. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted with a prospectively maintained colorectal surgery database (July 2018 through October 2019). PATIENTS: Patients with enhanced recovery robotic colorectal resections with specimen extraction were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Propensity score weighting was used to derive adjusted rates for numeric pain scores, inpatient opioid use, opioids prescribed at discharge, opioid refills after discharge, and other related outcomes. For comparing outcomes between groups, p values were calculated using weighted χ2, Fisher exact, and t tests. RESULTS: There were 137 cases (70.9%) with Pfannenstiel extraction site incisions and 56 (29.0%) at other locations (7 midline, 49 off-midline). There was no significant difference in transversus abdominis plane blocks and epidural analgesia use between groups. Numeric pain scores, overall benefit of analgesia scores, inpatient postoperative opioid use, opioids prescribed at discharge and taken after discharge, and opioid refills were not significantly different between groups. Nonopioid pain analgesics (acetaminophen, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and gabapentin) prescribed at discharge were significantly less in the Pfannenstiel group (90.19% vs 98.45%; p = 0.006). Postoperative complications and readmissions were not different between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted at a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: The Pfannenstiel incision as the specimen extraction site choice in minimally invasive surgery is associated with similar postoperative pain and opioid use as extraction sites in other locations for patients having robotic colorectal resections. Specimen extraction sites may be chosen based on patient factors other than pain and opioid use. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B495. DOLOR POSTOPERATORIO DESPUS DE VAS DE RECUPERACIN MEJORADA EN CIRUGA ROBTICA DE COLON Y RECTO IMPORTA EL LUGAR DE EXTRACCIN DE LA MUESTRA: ANTECEDENTES:La actual crisis de opioides ha motivado a los cirujanos a evaluar críticamente, formas para equilibrar el dolor postoperatorio, disminuyendo el uso de opioides y por lo tanto, disminuyendo opioides disponibles para el desvío comunitario. La incisión más amplia en cirugía colorrectal robótica, es la incisión del sitio de extracción de la muestra. Las técnicas intracorpóreas permiten que la extracción de la muestra se realice en cualquier sitio.OBJETIVO:El estudio fue diseñado para determinar si la ubicación del Pfannenstiel está asociada con menos dolor y uso de opioides, a otros sitios de extracción de la muestra en la pared abdominal.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Estudio de base de datos de cirugía colorrectal mantenida prospectivamente (7/2018 a 10/2019).PACIENTES:Se incluyeron resecciones robóticas colorrectales con recuperación mejorada y extracción de muestras.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Se utilizó la ponderación del puntaje de propensión para derivar las tasas ajustadas para los puntajes numéricos de dolor, uso de opioides en pacientes hospitalizados, opioides recetados al alta, recarga de opioides después del alta y otros resultados relacionados. Para comparar los resultados entre los grupos, los valores p se calcularon utilizando chi-cuadrado ponderado, exacto de Fisher y pruebas t.RESULTADOS:Hubo 137 (70,9%) casos con incisiones en el sitio de extracción de Pfannenstiel y 56 (29,0%) en otras localizaciones (7 en la línea media, 49 fuera de la línea media). No hubo diferencias significativas en los bloqueos del plano transverso del abdomen y el uso de analgesia epidural entre los grupos. Las puntuaciones numéricas de dolor, puntuaciones de beneficio general de la analgesia, uso postoperatorio de opioides en pacientes hospitalizados, opioides recetados al alta y tomados después del alta, y las recargas de opioides, no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos. Los analgésicos no opioides (acetaminofén, antiinflamatorios no esteroideos, gabapentina) prescritos al alta, fueron significativamente menores en el grupo de Pfannenstiel (90,19% frente a 98,45%, p = 0,006). Las complicaciones postoperatorias y los reingresos, no fueron diferentes entre los grupos.LIMITACIONES:Una sola institución.CONCLUSIÓN:La incisión de Pfannenstiel como sitio de extracción de la muestra en cirugía mínimamente invasiva, se asocia con dolor postoperatorio y uso de opioides similar, a otros sitios de extracción en pacientes sometidos a resecciones robóticas colorrectales. Sitios de extracción de la muestra, pueden elegirse en función de factores del paciente distintos al dolor y uso de opioides. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B495.).

Organ Preservation in the Treatment of Stage II and III Rectal Cancer.

CASE SUMMARY: A 65-year-old man underwent colonoscopy to evaluate rectal bleeding and was found to have a low rectal mass. Biopsy revealed moderately differentiated microsatellite stable adenocarcinoma. The tumor was palpable at the fingertip in the anterior rectum with the inferior border 5 cm from the anal verge by rigid proctoscopy. CEA was 0.8 ng/mL. CT imaging of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis showed no evidence of distant metastases. MRI confirmed a 5-cm mass with one 8-mm mesorectal lymph node metastasis and no extramural venous invasion. The tumor penetrated the mesorectal fat to a depth of 4 mm, and the circumferential margin was estimated to be 1 mm from the tumor (). He was presented at the multidisciplinary tumor board conference and interviewed and examined at the multidisciplinary clinic. He was dismayed at the prospect of his surgical options, a low anterior resection versus abdominoperineal resection, and wished to keep the options for organ preservation available. Standard long-course chemoradiation was initiated, with resolution of his bleeding after 2 weeks. He then completed 6 cycles of folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) chemotherapy (consolidation total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT)). The tumor was no longer palpable on office examination. A complete clinical response (cCR) was confirmed by flexible sigmoidoscopy () and MRI (). He was entered into the nonoperative management program with intense surveillance scheduling and has no evidence of recurrent disease almost 2 years after completion of TNT.

Recurrence of Acute Right Colon Diverticulitis Following Nonoperative Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are currently no guidelines on the management of right colon diverticulitis. Treatment options have been extrapolated from the management of left-sided diverticulitis. Gaining knowledge of the risk and morbidity of diverticulitis recurrence is integral to weighing the benefit of elective surgery for right-sided diverticulitis. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to summarize the recurrence rate and the morbidity of recurrence of Hinchey classification I/II, right-sided diverticulitis following nonoperative management. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database of Collected Reviews were searched up to June 2019. STUDY SELECTION: Observational cohort studies evaluating outcomes following nonoperative management were reviewed. No randomized controlled trials were available. INTERVENTIONS: Intravenous antibiotics with or without percutaneous drainage of associated abscess were administered. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the recurrence rate and morbidity associated with recurrence. Two independent investigators extracted data. The rates of recurrence were pooled by using a random-effects model. RESULTS: There were 1584 adult participants from a total of 11 studies (9 retrospective cohort and 2 prospective cohort studies) included in the analysis. Over a median follow-up period of 34.2 months, the pooled recurrence rate was 12% (95% CI, 10%-15%). Twenty of 202 patients (9.9%) required urgent surgery at the time of first recurrence. There was no mortality. Subset analysis excluding 3 studies that included percutaneous drainage as a nonoperative treatment option did not change the recurrence rate (12% (95% CI, 9%-15%)) or heterogeneity. Funnel plot assessment revealed no publication bias. LIMITATIONS: There were no randomized controlled trials available. The statistical heterogeneity was moderate (I = 46%). CONCLUSIONS: Nonoperative management of Hinchey I/II right-sided diverticulitis is safe and feasible. The recurrence rate is relatively low, and complications that require urgent operation are uncommon. PROSPERO: CRD42019131673.

Colon and Rectal Surgery Robotic Training Programs: An Evaluation of Gender Disparities.

BACKGROUND: Female surgeons are subjected to implicit bias throughout their careers. The evaluation of gender bias in training is warranted with increasing numbers of female trainees in colon and rectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate gender bias in colon and rectal surgery training program operative experience. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Association of Program Directors for Colon and Rectal Surgery robotic case log database contains operative details (procedure, attending surgeon, case percentage, and operative segments) completed by trainees as console surgeon for 2 academic years (2016-2017, 2017-2018). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcomes measured are the percentage of trainee console participation and the completion of total mesorectal excision. Resident and attending surgeon gender was recorded retrospectively. The cohort was separated into 4 groups based on resident and attending surgeon gender combination. Case volume, average console participation per case, and completion of total mesorectal excisions were compared for each group by using interaction regression analysis. RESULTS: Fifty-two training programs participated, including 120 trainees and 190 attending surgeons. Forty-five (37.5%) trainees and 36 (18.9%) attending surgeons were women. The average number of cases per trainee was 23.27 per year for women and 28.15 per year for men (p = 0.19). Average console participation was 53.5% for women and 61.7% for men (p < 0.001). Male attending surgeons provided female trainees less console participation than male counterparts (52.1% vs 59.7%, p < 0.001). Female attending surgeons provided the same amount of console participation to female and male trainees (63.3% vs 61.8%, p = 0.62). Male trainees performed significantly more complete total mesorectal excision console cases than female trainees (57.16% vs 42.38%, p < 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: The data are subject to self-reporting bias. CONCLUSIONS: There is gender disparity in robotic operative experience in colon and rectal surgery training programs with less opportunity for console participation and less opportunity to complete total mesorectal excisions for female trainees. This trend should be highlighted and further evaluated to resolve this disparity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B224. PROGRAMAS DE CAPACITACIÓN ROBÓTICA SOBRE CIRUGÍA DE COLON Y RECTO: UNA EVALUACIÓN DE LAS DISPARIDADES DE GÉNERO: Cirujanos mujeres están sujetas a sesgos implícitos a lo largo de sus carreras. La evaluación del sesgo de género en el entrenamiento se amerita por un número cada vez mayor de aprendices femeniles en cirugía de colon y recto.Evaluar el sesgo de género en la experiencia operativa en programas de entrenamiento de cirugía de colon y recto.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.La base de datos de registro de casos robóticos de la Asociación de Directores de Programas para Cirugía de Colon y Rectal contiene detalles operativos (procedimiento, cirujano asistente, porcentaje de casos y segmentos operativos) completados por los alumnos como cirujanos de consola durante dos años académicos (2016-17, 2017-18).Porcentaje de participación de la consola de entrenamiento y finalización de la escisión mesorrectal total. Se registraron retrospectivamente el sexo de los médicos residentes y asistentes. La cohorte se separó en cuatro grupos según la combinación de género residente y asistente. El volumen de casos, la participación promedio de la consola por caso y la finalización de las extirpaciones mesorrectales totales se compararon para cada grupo mediante el análisis de regresión de interacción.Participaron 52 programas de capacitación, incluidos 120 aprendices y 190 cirujanos asistentes. Cuarenta y cinco (37.5%) aprendices y 36 (18.9%) cirujanos asistentes eran mujeres. El número promedio de casos por aprendiz fue de 23.27 / año para mujeres y 28.15 / año para hombres (p = 0.19). La participación promedio de la consola fue del 53.5% para las mujeres y del 61.7% para los hombres (p <0.001). Los cirujanos asistentes masculinos proporcionaron a las mujeres aprendices menos participación en la consola en comparación con sus compañeros masculinos (52.1% vs 59.7%, p <0.001). Los cirujanos asistentes femeninos proporcionaron la misma cantidad de participación en la consola a los aprendices femeninos y masculinos (63.3% vs 61.8%, p = 0.62). Los aprendices masculinos realizaron casos de consola TME significativamente más completos que las aprendices femeninas (57.16% vs 42.38%, p <0.0001).Los datos están sujetos a sesgos de autoinforme.Existe una disparidad de género en la experiencia quirúrgica robótica en los programas de entrenamiento de cirugía de colon y recto con menos oportunidades para la participación de la consola y menos oportunidades para completar las extirpaciones mesorrectales totales para las mujeres en formación. Esta tendencia debe destacarse y evaluarse para resolver esta disparidad. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B224. (Traducción-Dr. Adrián Ortega).

Uptake of Total Mesorectal Excision and Total Mesorectal Excision Grading for Rectal Cancer: A Statewide Study.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision is associated with decreased local recurrence and improved disease-free survival following rectal cancer resection. The extent to which total mesorectal excision has been adopted in the United States is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grading in Michigan hospitals. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment were analyzed by using χ tests and linear regression. SETTINGS: Participating hospitals (initially 14 hospitals, now 38) abstracted medical records data for rectal cancer cases from 2007 to 2016. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent rectal cancer resection were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measures were surgeon-documented total mesorectal excision performance and pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade. RESULTS: Of 510 rectal cancer cases, 367 (72.0%) had surgeon-reported total mesorectal excision performance and 78 (15.3%) had pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade. Between-hospital variability in total mesorectal excision performance ranged from 0% to 97% and total mesorectal excision grading ranged from 0% to 90%. Total mesorectal excision grading was associated with a higher likelihood of also having adequate lymph node assessment (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). There has been a statistically significant trend toward an increase in total mesorectal excision grading in the original 14 hospitals (p = 0.001), but not in the complete cohort of all hospitals (p = 0.057). LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective cohort design with sampled rectal cancer cases. In addition, there is insufficient granularity to capture all factors associated with total mesorectal excision performance or grade assignment. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment are widely variable throughout the state of Michigan. Overall, grade assignment remains very low. This suggests an opportunity for quality improvement projects to increase total mesorectal excision performance and grading, involving both the surgeons and pathologists for effective implementation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53. IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL Y LA CLASIFICACIÓN POR ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL: UN ESTUDIO A NIVEL ESTATAL.: La escisión mesorrectal total se asocia con una menor recurrencia local y una mejor supervivencia libre de enfermedad después de la resección del cáncer rectal. Se desconoce hasta que punto se ha adoptado la escisión mesorrectal total en los Estados Unidos.Se intento evaluar las tendencias en el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los hospitales de Michigan.Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de la "Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative". Las tendencias en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total y la asignación de grado se analizaron mediante pruebas de chi-cuadrada y regresión lineal.Los hospitales participantes (inicialmente 14 hospitales, ahora 38) extrajeron datos de registros médicos de los casos de cáncer rectal desde 2007 hasta 2016.Pacientes que se sometieron a resección de cáncer rectal.Las principales medidas de resultado fueron el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total documentado por el cirujano y el grado de escisión mesorrectal total informada por el patólogo.De 510 casos de cáncer rectal, 367 (72.0%) tenían un rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el cirujano y 78 (15.3%) tenían un grado de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el patólogo. La variabilidad entre hospitales en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 97% y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 90%. La clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total se asoció con una mayor probabilidad de tener también una evaluación adecuada de los ganglios linfáticos (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). Ha habido una tendencia estadísticamente significativa hacia un aumento en la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los 14 hospitales originales (p = 0.001), pero no en la cohorte completa de todos los hospitales (p = 0.057).Diseño de cohorte retrospectivo con casos de cáncer rectal muestreados. Además, no hay suficiente granularidad para capturar todos los factores asociados con el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total o la asignación de grados.Las tasas de rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total y asignación de grado son muy variables en todo el estado de Michigan. En general, la asignación de calificaciones sigue siendo muy baja. Esto sugiere una oportunidad para que los proyectos de mejora de la calidad aumenten el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total, involucrando tanto a los cirujanos como a los patólogos para una implementación efectiva. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53.