Kelley, Scott R.

BACKGROUND: Discharge on postoperative day 3 after laparoscopic colorectal resections is now common, and same-day discharge has been proposed recently as an option. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the safety of same-day and next-day discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery and to delineate which characteristics may make a patient eligible for this pathway. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Colectomy Participant User File was used. PATIENTS: Patients underwent elective laparoscopic colorectal resection and were discharged without complications on or before postoperative day 5 (early discharge: postoperative day 0 or 1, intermediate: postoperative day 2, standard: postoperative day 3 to 5). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Early readmission (on or before postoperative day 7), anastomotic leak, ileus, and overall readmission were measured. RESULTS: Of 36,526 patients total, 906 (2.5%) were discharged on postoperative day 0 or 1. Patients discharged on postoperative day 0/1 tended to have shorter-duration operations, a diagnostic indication more commonly of benign neoplasm, and underwent less low pelvic anastomoses. The readmission rate within 7 days was only 2%. Overall rates of anastomotic leak (0.6% early, 1.0% intermediate, 1.2% standard), ileus (1.9% early, 1.5% intermediate, 2.1% standard), and readmission (early 4.8%, intermediate 5.1%, standard 5.8%) were equivalent to decreased in patients discharged early versus those discharged in the intermediate or standard discharge groups. On multivariable analysis, dismissal day remained a noncontributory-to-protective factor against anastomotic leak, ileus, and readmission. LIMITATIONS: Specific follow-up pathways used were unknown, and selection bias exists in deciding what day patients can be discharged. CONCLUSIONS: Discharge on the same day or next day after surgery was not associated with increased risk compared with discharge on postoperative day 3 to 5, and it did not result in a high rate of early readmissions. Increased use of expedited discharge pathways would reduce hospital costs and resource use. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B331. ¿Es razonable el alta el mismo día o al día siguiente, después de la colectomía laparoscópica en pacientes seleccionados ANTECEDENTES: Es común el alta hospitalaria en el 3er día postoperatorio, después de resecciones colorrectales laparoscópicas. Recientemente se ha propuesto como una opción, el alta el mismo día. OBJETIVO: Determinar la seguridad de alta el mismo día o al día siguiente después de la cirugía colorrectal laparoscópica, y delinear qué características pueden hacer que un paciente sea elegible para esta vía. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. AJUSTES: American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Colectomy Participant User File. PACIENTES: Se sometieron a resección colorrectal laparoscópica electiva, y se dieron de alta sin complicaciones durante el 5° día postoperatorio o antes (alta temprana: día 0 o 1 postoperatorio; intermedia: día 2 postoperatorio; estándar: día 3-5 postoperatorio). PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Reingreso temprano (en o antes del día 7 postoperatorio), fuga anastomótica, íleo y reingreso general. RESULTADOS: De 36,526 pacientes en total, 906 (2.5%) fueron dados de alta en el día 0 o 1 postoperatorio. Los pacientes dados de alta en el día 0/1 postoperatorio, tendieron a presentar operaciones de menor duración, indicación diagnóstica más frecuente de neoplasia benigna, y sometidos a menos anastomosis de pelvis baja. La tasa de readmisión dentro de los siete días, fue del 2%. Las tasas generales de fuga anastomótica (0.6% temprana, 1.0% intermedia, 1.2% estándar), íleo (1.9% temprana, 1.5% intermedia, 2.1% estándar) y reingreso (temprana 4.8%, intermedia 5.1%, estándar 5.8%) fueron equivalentes a la disminución en pacientes dados de alta temprana, versus aquellos dados de alta en los grupos intermedia o estándar. En el análisis multivariable, el día de alta no contribuyó al factor protector contra la fuga anastomótica, el íleo y el reingreso. LIMITACIONES: Se desconocen las vías de seguimiento específicas utilizadas y existe un sesgo de selección al decidir en qué día se puede dar de alta a los pacientes. CONCLUSIONES: El alta el mismo día o al día siguiente después de la cirugía, no se asoció con un mayor riesgo, en comparación con el alta en el postoperatorio en los días 3-5, y no dio lugar a una alta tasa de reingresos tempranos. Mayor utilización de las vías de alta acelerada, reducirían costos hospitalarios y utilización de recursos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B331. (Traducción—Dr Fidel Ruiz Healy)

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission rate is an important quality metric and has been recognized as a key measure of hospital value-based purchasing programs. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the risk factors for hospital readmission with a focus on potentially preventable early readmissions within 48 hours of discharge. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at a tertiary academic facility with a standardized enhanced recovery pathway. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients undergoing elective major colorectal resections between 2011 and 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Univariable and multivariable risk factors for overall and early (<48 hours) readmissions were identified. Specific surgical and medical reasons for readmission were compared between early and late readmissions. RESULTS: In total, 526 of 4204 patients (12.5%) were readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Independent risk factors were ASA score (≥3; OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1–2), excess perioperative weight gain (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.3–2.3), ileostomy (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1–2), and transfusion (OR, 2; 95% CI, 1.4–3), or reoperation (OR, 11.4; 95% CI, 7.4–17.5) during the index stay. No potentially preventable risk factor for early readmission (128 patients, 24.3% of all readmissions, 3% of total cohort) was identified, and index hospital stay of ≤3 days was not associated with increased readmission (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.7–1.2). Although ileus and small-bowel obstruction (early: 43.8% vs late: 15.5%, p < 0.001) were leading causes for early readmissions, deep infections (3.9% vs 16.3%, p < 0.001) and acute kidney injury (0% vs 5%, p = 0.006) were mainly observed during readmissions after 48 hours. LIMITATIONS: Risk of underreporting due to loss of follow-up and the potential co-occurrence of complications were limitations of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Early hospital readmission was mainly due to ileus or bowel obstruction, whereas late readmissions were related to deep infections and acute kidney injury. A suspicious attitude toward potential ileus-related symptoms before discharge and dedicated education for ostomy patients are important. A short index hospital stay was not associated with increased readmission rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B237. REINGRESOS DENTRO DE LAS 48 HORAS POSTERIORES AL ALTA: RAZONES, FACTORES DE RIESGO Y POSIBLES MEJORAS ANTECEDENTES: La tasa de reingreso hospitalario es una métrica de calidad importante y ha sido reconocida como una medida clave de los programas hospitalarios de compras basadas en el valor. OBJETIVO: Evaluar los factores de riesgo para el reingreso hospitalario con énfasis en reingresos tempranos potencialmente prevenibles dentro de las 48 horas posteriores al alta. DISEÑO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. ESCENARIO: Institución académica terciaria con programa de recuperación mejorada estandarizado. PACIENTES: Pacientes consecutivos sometidos a resecciones colorrectales mayores electivas entre 2011 y 2016. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Se identificaron factores de riesgo uni y multivariables para reingresos totales y tempranos (<48 horas). Se compararon razones médicas y quirúrgicas específicas para el reingreso entre reingresos tempranos y tardíos. RESULTADOS: En total, 526/4204 pacientes (12,5%) fueron readmitidos dentro de los 30 días posteriores al alta. Los factores de riesgo independientes fueron puntuación ASA (≥3, OR 1.5; IC 95% 1.1–2), aumento de peso perioperatorio excesivo (OR 1.7; IC 95% 1.3–2.3), ileostomía (OR 1.4, IC 95%: 1–2) y transfusión (OR 2, IC 95% 1.4–3) o reoperación (OR 11.4; IC 95% 7.4–17.5) durante la estadía índice. No se identificó ningún factor de riesgo potencialmente prevenible para el reingreso temprano (128 pacientes, 24.3% de todos los reingresos, 3% de la cohorte total), y la estadía hospitalaria índice de ≤ 3 días no se asoció con un aumento en el reingreso (OR 0.9; IC 95% 0.7–1.2) Mientras que el íleo / obstrucción del intestino delgado (temprano: 43.8% vs. tardío: 15.5%, p < 0.001) fueron las principales causas de reingresos tempranos, infecciones profundas (3.9% vs 16.3%, p < 0.001) y lesión renal aguda (0 vs 5%, p = 0.006) se observaron principalmente durante los reingresos después de 48 horas. LIMITACIONES: Riesgo de subregistro debido a la pérdida en el seguimiento, posible co-ocurrencia de complicaciones. CONCLUSIONES: El reingreso hospitalario temprano se debió principalmente a íleo u obstrucción intestinal, mientras que los reingresos tardíos se relacionaron con infecciones profundas y lesión renal aguda. Es importante tener una actitud suspicaz hacia los posibles síntomas relacionados con el íleo antes del alta y una educación específica para los pacientes con ostomía. La estadía hospitalaria índice corta no se asoció con mayores tasas de reingreso. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B237.

Few series have reported on the impact of robotic right colectomy compared with conventional laparoscopy. Even fewer have reported on the outcomes of intracorporeal anastomoses. The aim of our study was to determine the impact of robotic surgery on short-term operative outcomes in patients undergoing right colectomy with intracorporeal anastomosis. One hundred and fourteen consecutive patients who underwent a right colectomy by two colorectal surgeons between 2012 and 2017 were included. Patients were separated into two groups: laparoscopic technique with extracorporeal anastomosis (n = 87) and robotic technique with intracorporeal anastomosis (n = 27). Univariate analysis was performed to determine differences in outcomes. Differences between cohorts were only identified with regard to gender (62 vs 37%, P = 0.022) and year of surgery. In comparison with laparoscopy, robotic colectomy resulted in a shorter time of GI recovery (1.3 ± 0.6 vs 3 ± 1.1, P < 0.0001), lower rates of postoperative ileus (4 vs 28%, P = 0.007), lower overall morbidity (26 vs 52%, P = 0.019), less blood loss ( P = 0.001), 50 per cent lower narcotic use, and longer operative time (255 ± 66 vs 139 ± 49, P < 0.001). Despite longer operative time, robotic surgery improved GI recovery, significantly lowered oral morphine equivalent usage, and decreased short-term complications.

Literature on postoperative urinary retention (POUR) after colorectal resections is limited. The aim of our study was to evaluate the incidence of and risk factors for POUR after elective colorectal resections in men ≥55 years without genitourinary issues. A retrospective review of elective colorectal resections (June 1, 2014 to June 1, 2015) in men ≥55 years without genitourinary conditions was performed at our institution. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologist score, body mass index (BMI), surgical history, type of disease, extent of resection, surgical approach, operating room (OR) time, volume of OR fluids administered, and intra- and postoperative urine output were included for analysis. Seventy patients were identified. Nine (12.9%) experienced POUR. Patients with POUR experienced longer OR time (324 vs 239 minutes; P = 0.048) and had a lower median BMI (23.8 vs 28 kg/m 2 ; P = 0.038). There were no significant differences in regards to age, comorbidities, diagnosis, type of resection, surgical approach, intravenous fluids administered operatively, or postoperative urine output. The incidence of POUR in male patients at least 55 years of age after elective colorectal resection in our institution was 12.9 per cent. Longer operative time and lower BMI were associated with a higher incidence of POUR.

Multimodal fast-track (FT) pathways for both open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery have been shown to improve gastrointestinal recovery, shorten length of stay, and decrease morbidity. The aim of our study was to determine if using alvimopan (Entereg)™ in the setting of a FT minimally invasive colorectal pathway is beneficial and cost-effective. All minimally invasive colorectal surgeries performed by one surgeon using a multimodal FT pathway with and without alvimopan were reviewed. Ninety total patients were identified, 64 patients treated without and 26 with alvimopan. Main outcomes included postoperative day tolerating a soft diet, return of gastrointestinal function, length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, and patient care, anesthesia, pharmacy, and combined cost. Tolerance of a soft diet, return of gastrointestinal function, and length of stay were all shorter and showed significance in the alvimopan group (mean 2.1 vs 2.8 days, mean 1.5 vs 2.4 days, and mean 3.5 vs 4.5 days, respectively) ( P = 0.0197, P = 0.0029, and 0.0158, respectively). Patient care and combined hospital costs were both increased in the nonalvimopan group; however, combined hospital costs was not significant ( P = 0.0216 and P = 0.0875, respectively). The 30-day readmission rate of 6.3 per cent was also not significant in this group ( P = 0.0941). Patients undergoing minimally invasive colorectal surgery treated with a multimodal FT pathway tolerated a soft diet sooner, had earlier return of bowel function, a shorter length of stay, and lower patient care and combined costs when alvimopan was used.

BACKGROUND: Transanal excision is the surgical treatment of choice for low-risk rectal pathology such as endoscopically unresectable polyps, very select early rectal cancers, as well as other benign and low-risk tumors. Robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery enhances the surgeon’s ability to work in the confined space of the rectum and helps overcome the limitations of other modalities for transanal excision. Large lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised transanally impart a particular challenge. Herein, we describe a hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach for excising large rectal lesions that extend to the dentate line and cannot be excised by utilizing traditional transanal techniques. TECHNIQUE: With the use of a standard transanal approach, the distal margin of the lesion is marked and lifted off of the internal sphincter muscle. The dissection is continued until above the anorectal ring, and a 5.5-cm transanal platform is introduced transanally. Insufflation with an 8-mm trocar is initiated and the robotic platform is docked transanally. A 1-cm circumferential proximal margin is marked, and the excision is continued robotically until en bloc resection of the lesion is completed. The defect is closed in a transverse fashion using barbed suture. For rare cases of circumferential or nearly circumferential full-thickness defects, interrupted barbed sutures are placed equidistant, the robot is undocked, the transanal platform is removed, and a handsewn coloanal anastomosis is performed allowing complete closure of the defect. RESULTS: A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach to large and low-lying rectal lesions is feasible and safe, and it has advantages over standard transanal excision including enhanced ergonomics, dexterity, and optics, as well as reduced rates of specimen fragmentation. CONCLUSION: A hybrid robotic transanal minimally invasive surgery approach allows for complete resection of very large polyps, which would otherwise be extremely challenging with standard transanal approaches. See Video at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B231.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak remains a critical complication after restorative rectal cancer surgery and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality rates, whereas reported rates range from 4% to 29%. Whether the occurrence of leak may have an impact on long-term oncological outcomes is under debate. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the oncological impact of anastomotic leak on patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: This is a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted at a high-volume colorectal center. PATIENTS: Data on patients who underwent restorative surgery for rectal adenocarcinoma from January 2000 until December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the impact of anastomotic leak, defined according to the classification proposed by the International Study Group of Rectal Cancer, on long-term overall survival, disease-free survival, disease-specific survival, and local recurrence. RESULTS: A total of 787 patients undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery for rectal cancer met the inclusion criteria. Forty-two (5.3%) patients presented a symptomatic anastomotic leak. The median follow-up period was 64 months. Fifty-one (6.5%) patients experienced a cancer-related death, 2 of 42 in the anastomotic leak group. Five-year overall survival, disease-specific survival, and disease-free survival were 88%, 94.7%, and 85.3%. Local recurrence rate was 2%. There was no difference in long-term overall survival, disease-specific survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rate between groups. On a multivariable analysis, anastomotic leak did not impact oncological outcomes. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by retrospective analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The occurrence of anastomotic leak after restorative resection for rectal cancer did not impact long-term oncological outcomes in our cohort of patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. RESULTADOS ONCOLÓGICOS A LARGO PLAZO DESPUÉS DE UNA FUGA ANASTOMÓTICA EN CIRUGÍA DE CÁNCER RECTAL ANTECEDENTES: La fuga anastomótica sigue siendo una complicación crítica después de la cirugía restauradora del cáncer rectal y se asocia con tasas significativas de morbilidad y mortalidad, mientras que las tasas reportadas varían del 4% al 29%. Se está debatiendo si la aparición de fugas puede tener un impacto en los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo. OBJETIVO: Describir el impacto oncológico de la fuga anastomótica en pacientes sometidos a cirugía de preservación del esfínter para adenocarcinoma rectal. DISEÑO: Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos mantenida prospectivamente. MARCO: El estudio se realizó en un centro colorrectal de alto volumen. PACIENTES: Se analizaron retrospectivamente los datos de pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía reparadora por adenocarcinoma rectal desde Enero de 2000 hasta Diciembre de 2013. MEDIDAS PRINCIPALES DE RESULTADOS: Impacto de la fuga anastomótica, definida de acuerdo con la clasificación propuesta por el Grupo de Estudio Internacional del Cáncer Rectal (International Study Group of Rectal Cancer), sobre la supervivencia general a largo plazo, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la recurrencia local. RESULTADOS: Un total de 787 pacientes sometidos a cirugía para preservar el esfínter por cáncer rectal cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión. Cuarenta y dos (5.3%) pacientes presentaron una fuga anastomótica sintomática. El tiempo mediano del período de seguimiento fue de 64 meses. Cincuenta y un (6.5%) pacientes sufrieron muerte relacionada con el cáncer, 2 de 42 en el grupo de fuga anastomótica. La supervivencia global a cinco años, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad y la supervivencia libre de enfermedad fueron del 88%, 94.7% y 85.3%, respectivamente. La tasa de recurrencia local fue del 2%. No hubo diferencias en la supervivencia global a largo plazo, la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad, la supervivencia libre de enfermedad y la tasa de recurrencia local entre los grupos. En un análisis multivariable, la fuga anastomótica no afectó los resultados oncológicos. LIMITACIONES: Este estudio fue limitado por análisis retrospectivo. CONCLUSIONES: La aparición de fuga anastomótica después de la resección restauradora para el cáncer rectal no afectó los resultados oncológicos a largo plazo en nuestra cohorte de pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B187. (Traducción—Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Kahlil)