Patient-reported outcomes 6 months after enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery.

BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been established as perioperative strategies associated with improved outcomes. However, intermediate and long-term patient-reported outcome data for patients undergoing ERAS interventions remain limited. We utilized an automated telephone survey 6 months post-colorectal surgery from patients who participated in an ERAS program to determine 6-month patient-reported outcomes and associated predictive factors.MethodsWe conducted a prospective observational study, using an automated telephone survey and researcher-administered telephone questionnaire 6 months after patients underwent abdominal colorectal surgery. Six-month significant outcomes were defined by persistent pain, hospital readmission, and patient satisfaction. Patients reporting these outcome variables were compared with patients who met none of these criteria. Additionally, analysis was performed to determine differences between patients that did and did not respond to the 6-month survey. A chi-square test was used to determine any relationship for categorical variables, a two independent sample t test for length of procedure/stay, and a Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for pain scores.ResultsOne hundred fifty-four of 324 patients contacted 6 months after surgery completed the automated telephone survey (47.53%). There was no statistical difference between patient populations completing and not completing the survey. Hospital 6-month readmission was associated with patients with a diagnosis of cancer (P = .049) and with a longer mean length of index procedure (282 vs. 206 minutes, P = .006). Median 6-month pain scores were higher for patients that underwent an open procedure compared to laparoscopic (Z = - 2.06, P = .04).ConclusionsLong-term benefits of an ERAS program were mostly confirmed. Longer procedure time and patients with cancer correlated with an increased likelihood of hospital 6-month readmission, suggesting that perioperative outcomes in complex cancer patients need to be evaluated over a longer time frame. In addition, invasiveness of procedure continues to have a significant effect on pain scores even 6 months later

Management of Radiation Proctitis

Radiation damage to the rectum following radiotherapy for pelvic malignancies can range from acute dose-limiting side effects to major morbidity affecting health-related quality of life. No standard guidelines exist for diagnosis and management of radiation proctitis. This article reviews the definitions, staging, and clinical features of radiation proctitis, and summarizes the modalities available for the treatment of acute and chronic radiation proctitis. Because of the paucity of well-controlled, blinded, randomized studies, it is not possible to fully assess the comparative efficacy of the different approaches to management. However, the evidence and rationale for use of the different strategies are presented

Colonic Polyps: Treatment

Colonic polyps are considered to be precursors of colon cancer based on several different molecular pathway models and should be resected with a principle of complete excisional biopsy. Several techniques are available for excisional biopsy, ranging from endoscopic techniques such as snare polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR), and endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) to surgical colonic resection and colonic endolaparoscopic surgery (CELS). This article focuses on these modalities with contemporary recommendations for choice of modality based on the size and features of the polyp encountered upon endoscopy. In addition, the morphologically apparent risk factors for polyps harboring invasive malignancy are discussed along with implications for management. Current literature on the comparative risks and benefits of EMR, ESD, CELS, and surgical resection is reviewed, as well as recommendations regarding cancer risk and subsequent surveillance

Enhanced recovery after surgery—Preoperative fasting and glucose loading—A review

In this review, we explore the rationale and history behind the practice of preoperative fasting in elective surgery including the gradual move toward longer fasting and the more recent change in direction of practice. Gastric emptying physiology and the metabolic effects of prolonged fasting and carbohydrate loading are examined. Most recent guidelines related to these topics are discussed and practical recommendations for implementing these guidelines are suggested

Microanalysis of video from a robotic surgical procedure: implications for observational learning in the robotic environment

Without haptic feedback, robotic surgeons rely on visual processing to interpret the operative field. To provide guidance for teaching in this environment, we analyzed intracorporeal actions and behaviors of a robotic surgeon. Six hours of video were captured by the intracorporeal camera during a robot-assisted lower anterior resection. After complete review, authors reduced the video to a consecutive 35 min of highly focused robotic activity and finally, a 2-min clip was subjected to microanalysis. The clip was replayed multiple times (capturing 1, 2, 10, 60 and 120 s intervals) and activities were identified, such as right and left hand motion, tissue handling and camera adjustments recorded using a software program. Activity patterns were categorized into two main themes: change in operative focus occurs when there is an inability to obtain adequate tension, and observation of robot-assisted surgery is based on an incomplete visual framework. The surgeon manipulated tissue predominantly using blunt adjustments and rarely grasped it, likely as a way to avoid tissue trauma. A magnified operative field required precise dissection, which occurs robotically with movement of a single instrument against a static field (motionless second robotic arm). This meticulous technique is unlike the bimodal manipulation often used for laparoscopic dissection. Since residents have limited active participation in robotic cases, and therefore, rely heavily on the captured image for skill acquisition, we recommend surgeons to use focus shifts as an opportunity to describe their operative decision-making and highlight instrument manipulations specific to operating with robotic technology

Patient-reported outcomes 6 months after enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery.

BackgroundEnhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs have been established as perioperative strategies associated with improved outcomes. However, intermediate and long-term patient-reported outcome data for patients undergoing ERAS interventions remain limited. We utilized an automated telephone survey 6 months post-colorectal surgery from patients who participated in an ERAS program to determine 6-month patient-reported outcomes and associated predictive factors.MethodsWe conducted a prospective observational study, using an automated telephone survey and researcher-administered telephone questionnaire 6 months after patients underwent abdominal colorectal surgery. Six-month significant outcomes were defined by persistent pain, hospital readmission, and patient satisfaction. Patients reporting these outcome variables were compared with patients who met none of these criteria. Additionally, analysis was performed to determine differences between patients that did and did not respond to the 6-month survey. A chi-square test was used to determine any relationship for categorical variables, a two independent sample t test for length of procedure/stay, and a Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test for pain scores.ResultsOne hundred fifty-four of 324 patients contacted 6 months after surgery completed the automated telephone survey (47.53%). There was no statistical difference between patient populations completing and not completing the survey. Hospital 6-month readmission was associated with patients with a diagnosis of cancer (P = .049) and with a longer mean length of index procedure (282 vs. 206 minutes, P = .006). Median 6-month pain scores were higher for patients that underwent an open procedure compared to laparoscopic (Z = - 2.06, P = .04).ConclusionsLong-term benefits of an ERAS program were mostly confirmed. Longer procedure time and patients with cancer correlated with an increased likelihood of hospital 6-month readmission, suggesting that perioperative outcomes in complex cancer patients need to be evaluated over a longer time frame. In addition, invasiveness of procedure continues to have a significant effect on pain scores even 6 months later

Proof-of-concept for intervention to prevent post-operative ileus in patients undergoing ileostomy formation.

BackgroundPreventing post-operative ileus (POI) is important given its associated morbidity and increased cost of care. The authors' prior work showed that POI in patients with newly created ileostomies is associated with a post-operative day (POD) 2 net fluid balance of > + 800 mL. The purpose of this study was to conduct an initial assessment of the efficacy of a pilot intervention.MethodsThis is a single-institution, pre-post-intervention, proof-of-concept study conducted on the Colorectal Surgery service at the University of California, San Francisco. The study included 58 procedures with ileostomy formation by board-certified colorectal surgeons between August 13, 2020 and June 1, 2021. The intervention included three adjustments to the standard Enhanced Recovery After Surgery protocol: addition of diuresis, delay in advancement to solid food, and earlier stoma intubation. Demographics, intraoperative factors, post-operative fluid balance, and outcomes (POI, post-procedure length of stay [LOS], hospitalization cost, and re-admissions) were compared between patients pre- and post-intervention.ResultsEight (13.8%) of the 58 procedures in the intervention period were associated with POI vs. a baseline POI rate of 32.6% (p = 0.004). Compared to patients without intervention, those with intervention had 67% less odds of POI (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.15-0.73, p = 0.01). This difference remained significant when adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, procedure duration, and operative approach (adjusted OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.14-0.72, p = 0.01). Average POD2 stoma output was 0.3 L greater (1.1 L vs. 0.8L; p < 0.001) and net fluid balance was 1.8 L lower (+ 0.3 L vs. + 2.1 L; p < 0.00001) for these 58 cases. Average post-procedure LOS was 1.9 days lower (5.3 vs. 7.2 days, p < 0.001) and direct cost was $5561 lower ($21,652 vs. $27,213, p = 0.004), with no difference in 30-day readmissions (p = 0.43).ConclusionsThis pilot intervention shows promise for reduction in POI in patients with newly created ileostomies. Additional assessment is needed to confirm these initial findings