Same Day Discharge Following Elective, Minimally Invasive, Colorectal Surgery : A Review of Enhanced Recovery Protocols and Early Outcomes by the Sages Colorectal Surgical Committee With Recommendations Regarding Patient Selection, Remote Monitoring, and Successful Implementation

BACKGROUND: As enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) have continued to evolve, the length of hospitalization (LOS) following elective minimally invasive colorectal surgery has continued to decline. Further refinements in multimodal perioperative pain management strategies have resulted in reduced opioid consumption. The interest in ambulatory colectomy has dramatically accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Severe restrictions in hospital capacity and fear of COVID transmission forced surgical teams to rethink strategies to further reduce length of inpatient stay. METHODS: Members of the SAGES Colorectal Surgery Committee began reviewing the emergence of SDD protocols and early publications for SDD in 2019. The authors met at regular intervals during 2020-2022 period reviewing SDD protocols, safe patient selection criteria, surrogates for postoperative monitoring, and early outcomes. RESULTS: Early experience with SDD protocols for elective, minimally invasive colorectal surgery suggests that SDD is feasible and safe in well-selected patients and procedures. SDD protocols are associated with reduced opioid use and prescribing. Patient perception and experience with SDD is favourable. For early adopters, SDD has been the natural evolution of well-developed ERPs. Like all ERPs, SDD begins in the office setting, identifying the correct patient and procedure, aligning goals and objectives, and the perioperative education of the patient and their supporting significant others. A thorough discussion with the patient regarding expected activity levels, oral intake, and pain control post operatively lays the foundation for a successful application of SDD programs. These observations may not apply to all patient populations, institutions, practice types, or within the scope of an existing ERP. However, if the underlying principles of SDD can be incorporated into an existing institutional ERP, it may further reduce the incidence of post operative ileus, prolonged LOS, and improve the effectiveness of oral analgesia for postoperative pain management and reduced opioid use and prescribing. CONCLUSIONS: The SAGES Colorectal Surgery Committee has performed a comprehensive review of the early experience with SDD. This manuscript summarizes SDD early results and considerations for safe and stepwise implementation of SDD with a specific focus on ERP evolution, patient selection, remote monitoring, and other relevant considerations based on hospital settings and surgical practices

Hernia Prevention Using Biologic Mesh and/or Small Bites: A Multispecialty 2 × 2 Factorial Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND: Ventral incisional hernias are the most common complication after abdominal operation. Randomized trials have shown efficacy of prophylactic synthetic mesh and small bites. Adoption of these practices has been limited due to concerns with placement of synthetic mesh in contaminated cases and small bites in an overweight population. We sought to assess the efficacy of prophylactic biologic mesh and small bites to prevent postoperative major complications: ventral incisional hernias, surgical site infection, reoperation, and death. STUDY DESIGN: High-risk patients (overweight/obese, current smoker) undergoing abdominal operation with a midline incision (5 cm or greater) were randomized (2 × 2 factorial trial) to receive either sublay biologic mesh or no mesh and either small bites (0.5 × 0. 5cm) or large bites (1 × 1 cm) fascial closure. The primary outcome measure was major complications at 1 year postoperative. CONSORT guidelines were followed, and this study was registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03148496). Assuming α = 0.05, β = 0.20, and Δ = 20%, it was estimated that 105 patients were needed. Primary outcome was assessed using Fisher\u27s exact test. RESULTS: A total of 107 patients were randomized: 52 (49%) to mesh, 55 (51%) to no mesh, 55 (51%) to small bites, and 52 (49%) to large bites. Of the patients, 16% were smokers, 31% were overweight, and 55% were obese. At 1 year postoperative, there were no differences in major complications between groups (mesh vs no mesh 21% vs 16%, p = 0.62; small vs large bites 18% vs 19%, p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: In this trial, biologic mesh and small bites appear to have no benefit. Further randomized trials are needed among high-risk patients before widespread adoption of prophylactic biologic mesh or small bites