Factors Identified by Lapsed Donors that Might Influence Donor Return

Introduction: The Burlington Chapter of the American Red Cross estimates that 8,000 donors a year become lapsed, or fail to return for further donation. To better target this population and retain current donors, it is essential to identify reasons for lapsed donation. Several studies have been conducted on the barriers to retaining blood donors, revealing these common factors: past physical reactions, convenience, previous deferrals, lack of awareness, medical reasons, time, satisfaction with the experience, too impersonal, and personal benefit. While many studies have identified reasons for lapsed donation, the majority have not used free text as their data source, have been conducted in a wide range of geographic locations not specific to Vermont residents, and have focused on reasons for discontinuing donations, rather than positive factors. Using free text limits the question bias and eliminates constraints that predefined answers enforce. In 2007, Balderama et alconducted a study identifying common motivations for donating blood, which included an unanalyzed free text portion. We used this free text to answer the question, “What factors identified by lapsed donors might influence donor return?”https://scholarworks.uvm.edu/comphp_gallery/1047/thumbnail.jp

Direct stick embolization of a rectal venous malformation via transanal minimally invasive surgery

Rectal venous malformations (VMs) are rare clinical entities with variable patterns of presentation. Treatment requires unique, targeted strategies based on the symptoms, associated complications, and location, depth, and extent of the lesion. We present a rare case of a large, isolated rectal VM treated by direct stick embolization (DSE) using transanal minimally invasive surgery (TAMIS). A 49-year-old man had presented with a rectal mass incidentally detected on computed tomography urography. Magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopy revealed an isolated rectal VM. Elevated D-dimer levels concerning for localized intravascular coagulopathy warranted the use of prophylactic rivaroxaban. To avoid invasive surgery, DSE using TAMIS was performed successfully without complications. His postoperative recovery was uneventful, aside from a self-limiting and expected course of postembolization syndrome. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of TAMIS-assisted DSE of a colorectal VM. TAMIS shows promise for more widespread use in the minimally invasive, interventional management of colorectal vascular anomalies

Delayed colorectal cancer care during covid-19 pandemic (decor-19). Global perspective from an international survey

Background The widespread nature of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been unprecedented. We sought to analyze its global impact with a survey on colorectal cancer (CRC) care during the pandemic. Methods The impact of COVID-19 on preoperative assessment, elective surgery, and postoperative management of CRC patients was explored by a 35-item survey, which was distributed worldwide to members of surgical societies with an interest in CRC care. Respondents were divided into two comparator groups: 1) ‘delay’ group: CRC care affected by the pandemic; 2) ‘no delay’ group: unaltered CRC practice. Results A total of 1,051 respondents from 84 countries completed the survey. No substantial differences in demographics were found between the ‘delay’ (745, 70.9%) and ‘no delay’ (306, 29.1%) groups. Suspension of multidisciplinary team meetings, staff members quarantined or relocated to COVID-19 units, units fully dedicated to COVID-19 care, personal protective equipment not readily available were factors significantly associated to delays in endoscopy, radiology, surgery, histopathology and prolonged chemoradiation therapy-to-surgery intervals. In the ‘delay’ group, 48.9% of respondents reported a change in the initial surgical plan and 26.3% reported a shift from elective to urgent operations. Recovery of CRC care was associated with the status of the outbreak. Practicing in COVID-free units, no change in operative slots and staff members not relocated to COVID-19 units were statistically associated with unaltered CRC care in the ‘no delay’ group, while the geographical distribution was not. Conclusions Global changes in diagnostic and therapeutic CRC practices were evident. Changes were associated with differences in health-care delivery systems, hospital’s preparedness, resources availability, and local COVID-19 prevalence rather than geographical factors. Strategic planning is required to optimize CRC care