Citations 19

The impact of nonoperative management of rectal cancer on colon and rectal surgery residents in the United States

Colorectal Disease | May 21, 2025 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 5 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/codi.70125 | PMID 40396673

AbstractAimThere is increasing adoption of nonoperative management of rectal cancer; however, the extent to which trainees are proficient in nonoperative management is unclear. The aim of this work was to describe the exposure of recent colorectal resident graduates to nonoperative management, their comfort level in assessing clinical responses and their comfort in performing rectal cancer surgeries.MethodThis was an online survey of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education‐certified colorectal surgery residency graduates of training programmes in 2020, 2021 and 2022 utilizing their respective WhatsApp class chat groups. Data on resident comfort in assessing complete or near complete clinical response as part of nonoperative management, adoption in practice and perceived effects on rectal cancer operative experience were collected.ResultsForty five graduates responded, with 83.3% exposed to nonoperative management in training. Eighty five per cent utilize nonoperative management in their own practices and 37.1% felt it had a negative impact on preparing them for rectal cancer surgeries. While 82.4% felt comfortable assessing a complete clinical response, only 61.8% felt comfortable assessing a near complete response. Residents who perceived a positive effect on their training felt more comfortable assessing a complete or near complete response.ConclusionMost recent graduates were exposed to nonoperative management in training and utilize it in practice, although many did not feel comfortable assessing a near complete response. A significant portion felt it had a negative impact on their experience and quantity of rectal cancer surgeries. This suggests a need to improve colorectal resident education in nonoperative management of rectal cancer while simultaneously preserving surgical experience for trainees.
Does timing of ileostomy closure impact postoperative morbidity?

Colorectal Disease | April 8, 2025 | Volume: 27 | Issue: 4 | Pages: No page available

10.1111/codi.70088 | PMID 40195019

Abstract Aim Reversal of diverting loop ileostomy (DLI) traditionally occurs at ≥12 weeks after formation. Early closure has been performed in attempts to reduce DLI‐associated morbidity. Therefore, the aim of this study was to determine whether time to stoma reversal impacts postoperative morbidity. Method A retrospective review was conducted using institutional‐level American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data for adult patients who underwent DLI closure between January 2012 and December 2021 across a multistate health system. Time to DLI closure was stratified into three groups: ≤12, 12–24 or 24–36 weeks. Additional data were obtained from the electronic medical record. The primary outcome was major morbidity after DLI closure. Results A total of 482 patients underwent DLI closure. Eighty four patients underwent closure at ≤12 weeks (17.4%), 300 at 12–24 weeks (62.2%) and 98 at 24–36 weeks (20.3%). The most common diagnosis at DLI formation was cancer ( n = 211, 43.8%). Patients in the ≤12 weeks closure group more commonly had ulcerative colitis or diverticular disease and a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists class than patients with closure at 24–36 weeks ( p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in complication severity, overall major morbidity or its individual components amongst the time to DLI closure groups. There were no differences in anastomotic leaks or need for laparotomy. On multivariable analysis, immunosuppressive therapy and preoperative haematocrit <30% were significant risk factors for major morbidity after DLI closure. Conclusion Major morbidity did not differ by time to DLI closure group, indicating that closure at ≤12 weeks is safe in selected patients.
Comparison of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Reimbursement Rate and Medical Malpractice Insurance Premium Cost Across the US from 2013 to 2023

Journal of the American College of Surgeons | March 7, 2025 | Volume: 241 | Issue: 1 | Pages: 77-86

10.1097/xcs.0000000000001376 | PMID 40052689

BACKGROUND: Within the US, there has been an overall increase in cost of malpractice insurance for surgeons and decrease in federal reimbursement for surgical work. This study aimed to analyze state-to-state variability to understand differences in costs relative to reimbursement for surgeons and temporal trends. STUDY DESIGN: This study uses publicly available data to conduct a cross-sectional evaluation of surgeon medical malpractice premium rates and surgical reimbursement between 2013 and 2023. Surgeon reimbursement was represented in terms of the unit reimbursement rate for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). The ratio of surgeon reimbursement to malpractice cost was calculated and considered as the number of LCs required in each state to cover the cost of malpractice insurance. RESULTS: Inflation-adjusted reimbursement for LC decreased in all states with a mean decrease of 24%. Although there was an overall decrease in inflation-adjusted medical malpractice premium cost, some states experienced an increase of up to 22% (Rhode Island), whereas other states experienced a decrease in cost of 62% (Oregon). For the year 2023, there was significant variability in the number of LCs needed to afford malpractice insurance premiums across states, ranging from 21 (Minnesota) to 163 (Illinois). Rhode Island experienced the greatest increase in change from 2013 to 2023 (63%), whereas Oregon experienced the greatest decrease (50%). CONCLUSIONS: This study finds significant variation in Medicare-based surgeon compensation relative to malpractice insurance costs across the US. This discrepancy highlights the challenges faced by surgical practices due to inconsistent insurance cost and decreases in reimbursement rates.
Complete pathologic response in esophageal adenocarcinoma: does it make a difference?

Diseases of the Esophagus | August 22, 2024 | Volume: 37 | Issue: 12 | Pages: No page available

10.1093/dote/doae068 | PMID 39169845

SUMMARY Advancements in neoadjuvant regimens for esophageal adenocarcinoma have enabled some patients to achieve complete pathologic response at time of esophagectomy. There are currently limited data detailing this trend or the implications of complete pathologic response on survival. The National Cancer Database was used to identify 16,169 patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma that received trimodal therapy including esophagectomy between 2006 and 2020. Of these, 11.4% had complete pathologic response at esophagectomy. Patient factors, staging characteristics, and survival trends were evaluated. In patients diagnosed between 2016 and 2020, the rate of complete pathologic response was 17.5%. Female sex (OR 1.295, 95% CI 1.134–1.481, p = 0.0001), Black race (OR 1.729, 95% CI 1.362–2.196, p = 0.0002), Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.418, 95% CI 1.073–1.875, p = 0.0141), and later era of diagnosis (2016–2020 OR 2.898, 95% CI 2.508–3.349, p &lt; 0.0001) were independent predictors of complete pathologic response. Clinical stage II disease was associated with an increased probability of complete pathologic response (OR 1.492, 95% CI 1.19–1.871) while clinical stage III disease had a decreased probability of complete pathologic response (OR 0.762, 95% CI 0.621–0.936, p &lt; 0.0001). Complete pathologic response conveyed a strong survival benefit, with a median survival of 86.4 months (95% CI 73.9–102.1) versus 30.7 months (95% CI 29.8–31.7, p &lt; 0.0001) in those without complete pathologic response. Four-year median survival was also higher in those with complete pathologic response (63.3%, 95% CI 60.8–66.0% vs. 39.2%, 95% CI 38.4–40.1%, p &lt; 0.0001). In summary, complete pathologic response is associated with a profound survival advantage in patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma. Such knowledge carries implications for patient counseling, prognostication, and surveillance and demonstrates a need for improved identification of complete clinical response prior to esophagectomy.
Changes in US colorectal cancer mortality trends over the past 20 years.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | June 4, 2024 | Volume: 42 | Issue: 16_suppl | Pages: e15543-e15543

10.1200/jco.2024.42.16_suppl.e15543

e15543 Background: In the last two decades, colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality has been decreasing in the United States (US). However, the mortality trends for the different subtypes of CRC, including different sides of colon, rectosigmoid, and rectal cancer remain unclear. Methods: We analyzed death certificate data from CDC WONDER from 1999 to 2020. We calculated age-adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) per 100,000 individuals of CRC and its different subtypes and examined the trends over time by estimating the average annual percent change (AAPC) using the Joinpoint Regression Program. Results: From 1999 to 2020, 1,166,099 deaths were attributed to CRC, of which 957,182 deaths (82.08%) were due to colon cancer, 148,862 deaths (12.77%) from rectal cancer, and 60,055 deaths (5.15%) from rectosigmoid cancer. The overall CRC rates decreased significantly from 26.42 (95% CI, 26.20-26.64) to 15.98 (95% CI, 15.84-16.12) per 100,000 individuals, with AAPC of -2.41 (95% CI, -2.55, -2.27). However, the AAMR of rectosigmoid cancer increased significantly from 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78 -0.86) to 1.08 (95% CI, 1.04-1.11) per 100,000 individuals and the AAMR of right-sided colon cancer increased from 0.57 (95% CI, 0.54-0.60) to 0.70 (95% CI, 0.67-0.73) per 100,000 individuals, with AAPC of +1.10 (95%, 0.21-2.00) and +2.06 (95% CI, 0.85 - 3.27) respectively. Men had higher AAMR of CRC than women (23.90 [95% CI, 23.84-23.96] vs. 17.03 [95% CI, 16.99-17.08] per 100,000 individuals). African Americans had the highest AAMR of CRC (26.93 [95% CI, 26.79-27.07]), followed by Whites (19.60 [95%, 19.56-19.64] per 100,000 individuals), American Indians (14.53 [95%, 14.15-14.92] per 100,000 individuals), and Asians (13.04 [95%, 12.89-13.19] per 100,000 individuals). The overall AAMR of CRC decreased for those aged ≥ 50 years but increased significantly from 1.02 to 1.58 per 100,000 individuals for those aged 15-49 years, with an AAPC of +0.75. The AAMR from CRC was the highest in the Midwest (21.04 [95% CI, 20.96-21.12] per 100,000 individuals), followed by the South (20.51 [95% CI, 20.44-20.57]), the Northeast (20.30 [95% CI, 20.22-20.38] per 100,000 individuals), and the West (18.03 [95% CI, 17.95-18.10] per 100,000 individuals). Rural populations had higher AAMR than urban populations (22.40 [95% CI, 22.30-22.49] vs. 19.60 [95%, 19.56-19.64] per 100,000 individuals). Conclusions: Although overall CRC mortality declined, there were rising trends in young-onset CRC, rectosigmoid cancer, and right-sided colon cancer. Disparities persist in terms of sex, race, geographic region, and urbanization level, emphasizing the need for targeted public health measures.
How have US colorectal cancer mortality trends changed in the past 20 years?

International Journal of Cancer | March 25, 2024 | Volume: 155 | Issue: 3 | Pages: 493-500

10.1002/ijc.34926 | PMID 38525799

Abstract In the last two decades, colorectal cancer (CRC) mortality has been decreasing in the United States. However, the mortality trends for the different subtypes of CRC, including different sides of colon, rectosigmoid, and rectal cancer remain unclear. We analyzed the mortality trends of different subtypes of CRC based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Wide‐Ranging Online Data for Epidemiologic Research data from 1999 to 2020. We calculated age‐adjusted mortality rates (AAMR) per 100,000 individuals and examined the trends over time by estimating the average annual percent change (AAPC) using the Joinpoint Regression Program. Our study shows that the overall CRC rates decreased significantly from 26.42 to 15.98 per 100,000 individuals, with an AAPC of −2.41. However, the AAMR of rectosigmoid cancer increased significantly from 0.82 to 1.08 per 100,000 individuals, with the AAPC of +1.10. Men and Black individuals had the highest AAMRs respectively (23.90 vs. 26.93 per 100,000 individuals). The overall AAMR of CRC decreased for those aged ≥50 years but increased significantly from 1.02 to 1.58 per 100,000 individuals for those aged 15–49 years, with an AAPC of +0.75. Rural populations had a higher AAMR than the urban populations (22.40 vs. 19.60 per 100,000 individuals). Although overall CRC mortality declined, rising trends in young‐onset CRC and rectosigmoid cancer warrant attention. Disparities persist in terms of sex, race, and geographic region, and urbanization level, emphasizing the need for targeted public health measures.
Medicare Reimbursement in Colorectal Surgery: A Growing Problem

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | January 17, 2023 | Volume: 66 | Issue: 9 | Pages: 1194-1202

10.1097/dcr.0000000000002627 | PMID 36649185

BACKGROUND: Medicare reimbursement rates have decreased across various specialties but have not yet been studied in colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze Medicare reimbursement trends in colorectal surgery. DESIGN: Observational study. SETTING: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ Physician Fee Schedule was evaluated for reimbursement data for the 20 most common colorectal surgery procedures from 2006 to 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Inflation-adjusted annual percentage change, compound annual growth rate, and total percentage change were the outcome measures. A subanalysis was performed comparing the changes in reimbursement between 2006 to 2016 and 2016 to 2020 because of legislative changes that went into effect in 2016. RESULTS: During the study period, the inflation-unadjusted mean Medicare reimbursement rate for the 20 most common colorectal surgery procedures increased by +15.6%. This rise was surpassed by the inflation rate of +31.3%. Consequently, the inflation-adjusted reimbursement rate decreased by –11%. The adjusted reimbursement rates decreased the most at –33.8% for a flexible colonoscopy with biopsy and increased the most at +45.3% for a diagnostic rigid proctosigmoidoscopy. Annual percentage change was –0.79%, and the compound annual growth rate was –0.98%. There was an accelerated decrease in annual reimbursement rates from 2016 to 2020 at –2.23% compared to 2006 to 2016 at –0.22% (p = 0.03). The only procedure that had an increase in adjusted reimbursement rate from 2016 to 2020 was the injection of sclerosing solution for hemorrhoids. LIMITATIONS: Only Medicare reimbursement data were analyzed. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare reimbursements for colorectal surgery procedures are decreasing at an accelerating rate. Although this study is limited to Medicare data, it still presents a representation of overall reimbursement changes because Medicare policies have a ripple effect in the commercial insurance market. It is vital to understand the financial trends to be able to structure future patient care teams and to advocate for the sustainability of colorectal surgery practices in the United States. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C136. REEMBOLSO DE MEDICARE EN CIRUGÍA COLORRECTAL: UN PROBLEMA CRECIENTE ANTECEDENTES: Las tasas de reembolso de Medicare han disminuido en varias especialidades, pero aún no han sido estudiado en cirugía colorrectal. OBJETIVO: Analizar las tendencias de reembolso de Medicare en cirugía colorrectal. DISEÑO: Estudio observacional. CONTEXTO: Se evaluó el programa de tarifas médicas de los Centros de Servicios de Medicare y Medicaid para obtener datos de reembolso de los 20 procedimientos más comunes en cirugía colorrectal entre los años 2006 y 2020. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: Variación porcentual anual ajustada por inflación, tasa de crecimiento anual compuesta y variación porcentual total. Se realizó un subanálisis comparando los cambios en el reembolso entre los años 2006 a 2016 y 2016 a 2020 debido a los cambios legislativos que entraron en vigencia en 2016. RESULTADOS: Durante el período de estudio, la tasa media de reembolso de Medicare sin ajuste por inflación para los 20 procedimientos más comunes en cirugía colorrectal aumentó en +15,6 %. Esta suba fue superada por la tasa de inflación del +31,3%. En consecuencia, la tasa de reembolso ajustada por inflación disminuyó un -11%. Lo máximo que disminuyeron las tasas ajustadas de reembolso fue a -33,8% para una colonoscopia flexible con biopsia y aumentaron más a +45,3% para una proctosigmoidoscopia rígida de diagnóstico. El cambio porcentual anual fue -0,79% y la tasa de crecimiento anual compuesto fue -0,98%. Hubo una disminución acelerada en las tasas de reembolso anual de 2016 a 2020 a -2,23 % en comparación con 2006 a 2016 a -0,22% (p = 0,03). El único procedimiento que tuvo un aumento en la tasa de reembolso ajustada de 2016 a 2020 fue la inyección de solución esclerosante para las hemorroides. LIMITACIONES: Solo se analizaron los datos de reembolso de Medicare. CONCLUSIONES: Los reembolsos de Medicare por procedimientos en cirugía colorrectal están disminuyendo a un ritmo acelerado. Aunque este estudio se limita a los datos de Medicare, aún presenta una representación de los cambios generales en los reembolsos, ya que las pólizas de Medicare tienen un efecto dominó en el mercado de seguros comerciales. Es fundamental comprender las tendencias financieras para poder estructurar futuros equipos de atención de pacientes y abogar por la sostenibilidad de las prácticas de cirugía colorrectal en los Estados Unidos. Consulte Video Resumen video en https://links.lww.com/DCR/C136. (Traducción—Dr. Osvaldo Gauto)
S131 Secondary Amyloidosis in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Patients: Findings From Three Tertiary Medical Centers

American Journal of Gastroenterology | December 5, 2022 | Volume: 117 | Issue: 12S | Pages: S33-S34

10.14309/01.ajg.0000898032.49194.8a

Research Perspective on The Role of Preoperative Imaging in the Detection of Lateral Lymph Node Metastases in Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Diagnostic Test Meta-analysis

Diseases of the Colon & Rectum | September 14, 2022 | Volume: 65 | Issue: 12 | Pages: 1447-1447

10.1097/dcr.0000000000002599 | PMID 36102814