Randomized clinical trial of accelerated enhanced recovery after minimally invasive colorectal cancer surgery (RecoverMI trial)

Feasibility of an < 24 h discharge pathway with tele-monitoring after elective colectomies: a pilot study

INTRODUCTION

Implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery principles has led to exploration of ambulatory pathways in surgery, including gastrointestinal surgery. However, implementation of ambulatory pathways after colorectal surgery has not been established yet. Previous studies suggest that discharge within 24 h in colorectal surgery is only possible with a clear protocol and careful patient selection.

METHODS

Single center prospective feasibility pilot study of thirty patients in one large non-academic teaching hospital in the Netherlands. Patients were included if they were between 18 and 80 years old, underwent elective minimal invasive colonic resection with anastomosis, had a ASA-score of I or II, fully understood the procedure, had a person at home the first 4 days after surgery and lived within 30 min travel radius to the hospital. Exclusion criteria were cT4 tumours, multi-visceral resections, insulin-dependent diabetes, anti-coagulants which required perioperative bridging, and perioperative complications. Patients followed a pathway with discharge within 24 h postoperatively and were monitored by a tele-monitoring smartphone application after discharge.

RESULTS

Thirty patients were included and twenty-one patients (70%) fulfilled discharge criteria within 24 h after surgery. Six (20%) patients were readmitted within 30 days. Complications occurred in six (20%) patients, which was classified as Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3 complication in one (3%) patient. Patients and health care provider satisfaction was high.

CONCLUSION

Findings of this study support the feasibility and safety of an early discharge protocol with tele-monitoring after minimal invasive colonic resection. Satisfaction of patients and health care providers was high.

Metrics for Evaluating Telemedicine in Randomized Controlled Trials: Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Telemedicine involves medical, diagnostic, and treatment-related services using telecommunication technology. Not only does telemedicine contribute to improved patient quality of life and satisfaction by reducing travel time and allowing patients to be seen in their usual environment, but it also has the potential to improve disease management by making it easier for patients to see a doctor. Recently, owing to IT developments, research on telemedicine has been increasing; however, its usefulness and limitations in randomized controlled trials remain unclear because of the multifaceted effects of telemedicine. Furthermore, the specific metrics that can be used as cross-disciplinary indicators when comparing telemedicine and face-to-face care also remain undefined.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to provide an overview of the general and cross-disciplinarity metrics used to compare telemedicine with in-person care in randomized controlled trials. In addition, we identified previously unevaluated indicators and suggested those that should be prioritized in future clinical trials.

METHODS

MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched for publications that met the inclusion criteria according to PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Extension for Scoping Reviews). Original, English-language articles on randomized controlled trials comparing some forms of telemedicine with face-to-face care from January 2019 to March 2024 were included, and the basic information and general metrics used in these studies were summarized.

RESULTS

Of the 2275 articles initially identified, 79 were included in the final analysis. The commonly used metrics that can be used across medical specialties were divided into the following 3 categories: (1) patient-centeredness (67/79, 85%), including patient satisfaction, workload, and quality of life; (2) patient outcomes (57/79, 72%), including general clinical parameters such as death, admission, and adverse events; and (3) cost-effectiveness (40/79, 51%), including cost assessment and quality-adjusted life year. Notably, only 25 (32%) of 79 studies evaluated all the 3 categories. Other metrics, such as staff convenience, system usability, and environmental impact, were extracted as indicators in different directions from the three categories above, although few previous reports have evaluated them (staff convenience: 8/79, 10%; system usability: 3/79, 4%; and environmental impact: 2/79, 3%).

CONCLUSIONS

A significant variation was observed in the metrics used across previous studies. Notably, general indicators should be used to enhance the understandability of the results for people in other areas, even if disease-specific indicators are used. In addition, indicators should be established to include all three commonly used categories of measures to ensure a comprehensive evaluation: patient-centeredness, patient outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Staff convenience, system usability, and environmental impact are important indicators that should be used in future trials. Moreover, standardization of the evaluation metrics is desired for future clinical trials and studies.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Open Science Forum Registries YH5S7; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YH5S7.

Impact of "Enhanced Recovery After Surgery" (ERAS) protocols vs. traditional perioperative care on patient outcomes after colorectal surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery is associated with a high risk of postoperative complications, including technical complications, surgical site infections, and other adverse events affecting patient safety and overall patient experience. "Enhanced Recovery After Surgery" (ERAS) is considered a new standard of care for streamlining the perioperative care of surgical patients with the goal of minimizing complications and optimizing timely patient recovery after surgery. This systematic review was designed to investigate the evidence-based literature pertinent to comparing patient outcomes after ERAS versus conventional perioperative care.

METHODS

This systematic review evaluates the performance of ERAS protocols against conventional care in colorectal surgery, focusing on various postoperative outcome measures. An extensive search was conducted across multiple electronic databases and registers from July 2 to July 5, 2024, complemented by citation searching on November 30, 2024. This approach led to the identification of 11 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the past decade, involving 1,476 adult participants. To ensure methodological rigor and transparency, the review followed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) 2020 guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024583074).

RESULTS

The implementation of ERAS protocols resulted in a notable decrease in hospital stay duration compared to conventional care, with reductions varying between 3 and 8 days across studies. ERAS patients also had faster gastrointestinal recovery, including quicker times to bowel movement, defecation, and resumption of normal diet. Furthermore, patients in ERAS groups showed notably reduced postoperative complications and opioid consumption, with patients experiencing lower pain scores on the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and reduced reliance on opioids. Additionally, nutritional recovery in ERAS patients was enhanced, with elevated albumin and total protein levels, alongside decreased inflammatory markers and improved immune function.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides compelling evidence supporting the integration of ERAS protocols into standard colorectal surgical practices. Future studies should aim to explore the variations in ERAS implementation, pinpoint the most impactful elements of ERAS, and work towards personalizing and standardizing these protocols across clinical settings. Additionally, evaluating long-term outcomes will help refine ERAS strategies, ensuring their enduring impact on patient recovery.

National trends and costs of same day discharge in patients undergoing elective minimally invasive colectomy

BACKGROUND

Enhanced Recovery Pathways (ERPs) have enabled safe same day discharge (SDD) of select patients after elective minimally invasive colectomy. We aimed to analyse the financial impact of SDD in these cases.

METHODS

We queried the Nationwide Readmission Database (2016-2019) and included patients with a hospital length of stay ≤2 days after minimally invasive elective colectomy. Propensity score matched pairs of patients discharged on the day of the operation and those discharged on post operative day 1 or 2 were compared. Our primary outcome was the combined cost of hospitalization and readmission.

RESULTS

SDD patients had lower comorbidity (33 ​% vs 21 ​%) and illness severity (79 ​% vs 63 ​%), more Medicare insurance (44 ​% vs 38 ​%), and more benign neoplasms (52 ​% vs 17 ​%). Most SDD patients underwent right colectomy (89 ​%). Across 647 matched pairs, total cost was significantly lower in SDD patients ($8000 vs. $12,900; p ​< ​0.001) due to cheaper index hospitalizations. No difference in readmission rates or costs emerged.

CONCLUSION

SDD reduced costs of index hospitalization and may be cost-effective in a select cohort of healthier patients.

Beyond the Operating Room: A Narrative Review of Enhanced Recovery Strategies in Colorectal Surgery

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have significantly transformed the management of patients undergoing colorectal surgery. This comprehensive review explores the key components and benefits of ERAS in colorectal procedures, focusing on preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative strategies aimed at improving patient outcomes. These strategies include preoperative patient education, multimodal analgesia, minimally invasive surgical techniques, and early mobilization. ERAS protocols reduce postoperative complications, shorten hospital stays, and enhance overall recovery, leading to better patient satisfaction and decreased healthcare costs. However, challenges such as patient adherence and managing high-risk patients remain critical areas for further research. Additionally, future research should focus on refining ERAS protocols, integrating novel technologies such as minimally invasive techniques, and evaluating long-term outcomes to further enhance the recovery process.

Impact of PIPAC-Oxaliplatin on Functional Recovery, Good Days, and Survival in a Refractory Colorectal and Appendiceal Carcinomatosis: Secondary Analysis of the US PIPAC Collaborative Phase 1 Trial

BACKGROUND

Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosolized chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel, minimally invasive, safe, and repeatable method to treat carcinomatosis. Evidence regarding the clinical benefit (quality of life and survival) of PIPAC compared with that of conventional standard therapy (ST) is lacking.

METHODS

This is the secondary analysis of the phase 1 US-PIPAC trial for refractory colorectal and appendiceal carcinomatosis. A PIPAC cohort was compared with a retrospective cohort of consecutive patients receiving ST. The primary outcome was number of good days (number of days alive and out of the hospital). The secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and objective functional recovery (daily step count).

RESULTS

The study included 32 patients (PIPAC, 12; ST, 20) with similar baseline characteristics. Compared with the ST cohort, the PIPAC cohort had lower median inpatient hospital stays (> 24 h) within 6 months (0 vs 1; p = 0.015) and 1 year (1 vs 2; p = 0.052) and higher median good days at 6 months (181 vs 131 days; p = 0.042) and 1 year (323 vs 131 days; p = 0.032). There was no worsening of HRQoL after repeated PIPACs. Step counts diminished immediately after PIPAC but returned to baseline within 2-4 weeks. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a favorable association between receipt of PIPAC and OS (median, 11.3 vs 5.1 months; p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Compared with ST, PIPAC was associated with higher number of good days, reduced hospitalization burden, and longer OS without a negative impact on HRQoL with repeated PIPACs. These findings are foundational for evaluation of PIPAC in a randomized clinical trial.

Robotic surgery versus conventional laparoscopy in colon cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare robotic versus laparoscopic colectomies in colon cancer patients in general complications.

METHODS

Nine databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) investigating patients with colon cancer, submitted to robotic surgery (RS) compared to a laparoscopic (LC) approach. The risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 tool, and certainty of the evidence was evaluated by Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Data synthesis was performed using the software R. The meta-analysis of the included studies was carried out using the fixed-effects model (DerSimonian and Laird). Heterogeneity was measured using I2 analysis.

RESULTS

A total of four studies were used with 293 patients. Three studies were used in this comparative LC vs. RS when evaluating infection rates on surgical wound sites. The odds ratio (OR) appeared to be slightly favorable to LC (OR = 3.05; 95% confidence interval-95%CI 0.78-11.96). In the hospitalization rates analysis, two randomized controlled trials were used, and the mean differences slightly favored the RS (MD = -0.54; 95%CI -2.28-1.19). GRADE evaluation detected a serious risk of bias due to RCT format and RoB-2 concurred.

CONCLUSION

Both types of procedures seem to have their own benefits, risks, and limitations. They seem close to equal in terms of postsurgical infection and hospitalization.

Impact of structured multicentre enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol implementation on length of stay after colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Increased length of stay after surgery is associated with increased healthcare utilization and adverse patient outcomes. While enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been shown to reduce length of stay after colorectal surgery in trial settings, their effectiveness in real-world settings is more uncertain. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of ERAS protocol implementation on length of stay after colorectal surgery, using real-world data.

METHODS

In 2012, ERAS protocols were introduced at 15 Ontario hospitals as part of the iERAS study. A cohort of patients undergoing colorectal surgery treated at these hospitals between 2008 and 2019 was created using health administrative data. Mean length of stay was computed for the intervals before and after ERAS implementation. Interrupted time series analyses were performed for predefined subgroups, namely all colorectal surgery, colorectal surgery without complications, right-sided colorectal surgery, and left-sided colorectal surgery. Sensitivity analyses were then conducted using adjusted length of stay, accounting for length of stay predictors, including: patient age, sex, marginalization, co-morbidities, and diagnosis; surgeon volume of cases, years in practice, and colorectal surgery expertise; hospital volume; and other contextual factors, including procedure type and timing, surgical approach, and in-hospital complications.

RESULTS

A total of 32 612 patients underwent colorectal surgery during the study interval. ERAS implementation led to a decrease in length of stay of 1.05 days (13.7%). Larger decreases in length of stay were seen with more complex surgeries, with a level change of 1.17 days (15.6%) noted for the subgroup of patients undergoing left-sided colorectal surgery. The observed decreases in length of stay were durable for the length of the study interval in all analyses. When adjusting for predictors of length of stay, the effect of ERAS implementation on length of stay was larger (reduction of 1.46 days).

CONCLUSION

Introducing formal ERAS protocols reduces length of stay after colorectal surgery significantly, independent of temporal trends toward decreasing length of stay. These effects are durable, demonstrating that ERAS protocol implementation is an effective hospital-level intervention to reduce length of stay after colorectal surgery.

Morbidity after accelerated enhanced recovery protocol for colon cancer surgery

Previous studies showed that accelerated enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) with discharge 1-3 days after colorectal surgery are feasible for specific patients without compromising patients' safety. This study aimed to examine the incidence, severity, and treatment of complications after treatment according to an accelerated ERP (CHASE). This accelerated ERP consisted of adjustments in pre-, peri- and postoperative care. Patients treated according to the CHASE protocol were compared to a retrospective cohort of patients who received standard ERAS care. The primary outcome was the rate of severe complications. The overall complication rates were similar in both cohorts (CHASE 30.7% vs ERAS 31.4%, p = 0.958) as well as severe complications (CHASE 20.9% vs ERAS 21.4%, p = 0.950). Among the 113 patients with a complicated course, the readmission rate was significantly higher in the CHASE cohort (41.9% vs 21.4%, p = 0.020). LOS after readmission was longer in the CHASE cohort (p = 0.018), but the total LOS was shorter (4 versus 6 days, p = 0.001). This study demonstrates that accelerated recovery can be safe for ASA I-II patients and has the potential to become a standard of care. Moreover, the CHASE protocol proved to be beneficial in terms of total LOS for patients with complications.

Probiotic Compounds Enhanced Recovery after Surgery for Patients with Distal Gastric Cancer: A Prospective, Controlled Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) for radical distal gastrectomy needs to be improved urgently. We investigated the effects of probiotic compounds (including Lactobacillus plantarum, L. rhamnosus, L. acidophilus, and Bifidobacterium animalis subsp.lactis) on enhance recovery after gastrectomy.

METHODS

The patients in this prospective study were divided into probiotic group (PG group, n = 36) and placebo group (CG group, n = 38), taking corresponding capsule according to the protocol during the perioperative period. We compared the trends in perioperative hematologic findings and the postoperative outcomes. Patients' feces were collected for bacterial 16S rRNA sequencing. Patients were followed up at 1 month postoperatively.

RESULTS

After the application of probiotics, the patients' postoperative inflammatory response level was reduced, and the trend of postoperative NLR decrease was significantly faster in the patients of the PG group than in the CG group (P = 0.047, partial η2 = 0.054). The trend of postoperative increase in serum albumin concentration in the patients of the PG group was significantly better than that in the CG group (P = 0.016, partial η2 = 0.078). In addition, patients in the PG group met discharge criteria earlier postoperatively and had fewer medical expenses. The quality of life of PG group was improved postoperatively. Postoperative inflammation-related markers, including the ratio of Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes, were increasing in untreated patients. In addition, the postoperative microbial diversity and abundance in the PG group remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

Probiotic compounds can reduce the inflammatory response after gastrectomy and enhance the recovery of the DGC patients by maintaining the stability of the gut microbiota.

How to Balance Prognostic Factors in Controlled Phase II Trials: Stratified Permuted Block Randomization or Minimization? An Analysis of Clinical Trials in Digestive Oncology

In controlled phase II trials, major prognostic factors need to be well balanced between arms. The main procedures used are SPBR (Stratified Permuted Block Randomization) and minimization. First, we provide a systematic review of the treatment allocation procedure used in gastrointestinal oncology controlled phase II trials published in 2019. Second, we performed simulations using data from six phase II studies to measure the impacts of imbalances and bias on the efficacy estimations. From the 40 articles analyzed, all mentioned randomization in both the title and abstract, the median number of patients included was 109, and 77.5% were multicenter. Of the 27 studies that reported at least one stratification variable, 10 included the center as a stratification variable, 10 used minimization, 9 used SBR, and 8 were unspecified. In real data studies, the imbalance increased with the number of centers. The total and marginal imbalances were higher with SBR than with minimization, and the difference increased with the number of centers. The efficiency estimates per arm were close to the original trial estimate in both procedures. Minimization is often used in cases of numerous centers and guarantees better similarity between arms for stratification variables for total and marginal imbalances in phase II trials.

Enhanced recovery after surgery protocols following emergency intra-abdominal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate whether Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery improve postoperative outcomes as compared to conventional care.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, WoS, CENTRAL, and Pubmed were searched from inception to December 2022. Articles were eligible if they were randomized controlled trials (RCT) or non-randomized studies comparing ERAS protocols to conventional care for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery. The outcomes included postoperative length of stay (LOS), postoperative morbidity, prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), and readmission. An inverse variance random effects meta-analysis was performed. A risk of bias was assessed with Cochrane tools. Certainty of evidence was assessed with GRADE.

RESULTS

After screening 1018 citations, 20 studies with 1615 patients in ERAS programs and 1933 patients receiving conventional care were included. There was a reduction in postoperative LOS in the ERAS group for patients undergoing upper gastrointestinal (GI) surgery (MD3.35, 95% CI 2.52-4.17, p < 0.00001) and lower GI surgery (MD2.80, 95% CI 2.62-2.99, p < 0.00001). There was a reduction in postoperative morbidity in the ERAS group for patients undergoing upper GI surgery (RR0.56, 95% CI 0.30-1.02, p = 0.06) and lower GI surgery (RR 0.66, 95%CI 0.52-0.85, p = 0.001). In the upper and lower GI subgroup, there were nonsignificant reductions in PPOI in the ERAS groups (RR0.59, 95% CI 0.30-1.17, p = 0.13; RR0.49, 95% CI 0.21-1.14, p = 0.10). There was a nonsignificant increased risk of readmission in the ERAS group (RR1.60, 95% CI 0.57-4.50, p = 0.50).

CONCLUSION

There is low-to-very-low certainty evidence supporting the use ERAS protocols for patients undergoing emergency intra-abdominal surgery. The currently available data are limited by imprecision.

United States-Based Colorectal Cancer Surgical Trials Lack Representation and Adequate Reporting of Racially and Ethnically Diverse Participants: Systematic Review and Regression Analysis

BACKGROUND

Despite the established National Institute of Health Revitalization Act, which aims to include ethnic and racial minority representation in surgical trials, racial and ethnic enrollment disparities persist.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the proportion of patients from minority races and ethnicities that are included in colorectal cancer surgical trials and reporting characteristics.

DATA SOURCES

Search was performed using MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central.

STUDY SELECTION

Inclusion criteria included 1) trials performed in the United States between January 1, 2000, and May 30, 2022; 2) patients with colorectal cancer diagnosis; and 3) surgical intervention, technique, or postoperative outcome. Trials evaluating chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or other nonsurgical interventions were excluded.

INTERVENTIONS

Pooled proportion and regression analysis was performed to identify the proportion of patients by race and ethnicity included in surgical trials and the association of year of publication and funding source.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Proportion of trials reporting race and ethnicity and proportion of participants by race and ethnicity included in surgical trials.

RESULTS

We screened 10,673 unique publications, of which 80 were examined in full text. Fifteen studies met our inclusion criteria. Ten (66.7%) trials did not report race, 3 reported races as a proportion of White participants only, and 3 reported 3 or more races. There was no description of ethnicity in 11 (73.3%) trials, with 2 describing "non-Caucasian" as ethnicity and 2 describing only Hispanic ethnicity. Pooled proportion of White participants was 81.3%, of Black participants was 6.2%, of Asian participants was 3.6%, and of Hispanic participants was 3.5%.

LIMITATIONS

A small number of studies was identified that reported racial or ethnic characteristics of their participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Both race and ethnicity are severely underreported in colorectal cancer surgical trials. To improve outcomes and ensure the inclusion of vulnerable populations in innovative technologies and novel treatments, reporting must be closely monitored.

Effect of Robotic Inferior Mesenteric Artery Ligation Level on Low Anterior Resection Syndrome in Rectum Cancer

Background: Life expectancy of patients with rectal cancer is increasing day by day with innovative treatments. Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), which disrupts the comfort of life in these patients, has become a serious problem. We aimed to evaluate the effect of high ligation (HL) and low ligation (LL) techniques on LARS in rectal cancer surgery performed with the robotic method. Materials and Methods: The data of patients diagnosed with mid-distal rectal cancer between 2016 and 2021 who underwent robotic low anterior resection by the same team in the same center with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided into two groups as those who underwent HL and LL procedures. Preoperative, 8 weeks after neoadjuvant treatment, 3 and 12 months after ileostomy closure were evaluated. Results: A total of 84 patients (41 HL, 43 LL) were included in the study. There was no statistically significant difference between the demographic characteristics and pathology data of the patients. Although there was a decrease in LARS scores after neoadjuvant treatment, there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups at 3 and 12 months after ileostomy closure (P: .001, P: .015). Conclusions: In patients who underwent robotic low anterior resection, there is a statistically significant difference in the LARS score in the first 1 year with the LL technique compared with that of the HL technique, and the LL technique has superiority in reducing the development of LARS between the two oncologically indistinguishable methods.

Transitional Care Navigation

OBJECTIVES

This manuscript aims to provide an extensive review of the literature, synthesize findings, and present substantial insights on the current state of transitional care navigation. Additionally, the existing models of care, pertaining to the concept and approach to transitional care navigation, will be highlighted.

METHODS

An extensive search was conducted though using multiple search engines, topic-specific key terminology, eligibility of studies, as well as a limitation to only literature of existing relevance. Integrity of the evidence was established through a literature review matrix source document. A synthesis of nursing literature from organizations and professional publications was used to generate a comparison among various sources of evidence for this manuscript. Primary evidence sources consisted of peer-reviewed journals and publications from professional organizations such as the AHRQ, Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and the Talbot research library.

RESULTS

A total of five systematic reviews (four with meta-analysis) published between 2016 and 2022 and conducted in several countries (Brazil, Korea, Singapore, and the US) were included in this review. A combined total of 105 studies were included in the systematic reviews with 53 studies included in meta-analyses. The review of the systematic reviews identified three overarching themes: care coordination, care transition, and patient navigation. Care coordination was associated with an increase in care quality rating, increased the health-related quality of life in newly diagnosed patients, reduced hospitalization rates, reduced emergency department visits, timeliness in care, and increased appropriateness of healthcare utilization. Transitional care interventions resulted to reduced average number of admissions in the intervention (I) group vs control (C) (I = 0.75, C = 1.02) 180 days after a 60-day intervention, reduced readmissions at 6 months, and reduced average number of visits 180 days after 60-day intervention (I = 2.79, C = 3.60). Nurse navigators significantly improved the timeliness of care from cancer screening to first-course treatment visit (MD = 20.42, CI = 8.74 to 32.10, P = .001).

CONCLUSION

The care of the cancer patient entails treatments, therapies, and follow-up care outside of the hospital setting. These transitions can be challenging as they require coordination and collaboration among various health care sites. The attributes of transitional care navigation overlap with care coordination, care transition, and patient navigation. There is an opportunity to formally develop a transitional care navigation model to effectively addresses the challenges in care transitions for patient including barriers to health professional exchange of information or communication across care settings and the complexity of coordination between care settings. The transitional care navigation and clinic model developed at a free-standing NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center is a multidisciplinary approach created to close the gaps in care from hospital to home.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

A transitional care navigation model aims to transform the existing perspectives and viewpoints of hospital discharge and transition of care to home or post-acute care settings as two solitary processes to that of a collective approach to care. The model supports provides an integrated continuum of quality, comprehensive care that supports patient compliance with treatment regimens, reinforces patient and caregiver education, and improves health outcomes.

Rescue designs in analgesic trials from 0 to 2 years of age: scoping review

Pediatric analgesic trials are challenging, especially in newborns and infants. Following an FDA-academic consensus meeting, we analyzed pragmatic rescue designs in postoperative trials of local anesthetics, acetaminophen, opioids, and NSAIDs involving children ages 0-2 years and assessed surgical volumes to provide trial design recommendations. Searches of PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, The Cochrane Library, and Web of Science were conducted. A scoping approach identified trends in analgesic trials with an emphasis on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) utilizing immediate rescue designs. Age-specific surgical volumes were estimated from French national databases. Of 3563 studies identified, 23 RCTs used study medication(s) of interest and immediate rescue paradigms in children ages 0-2 years. A total of 270 studies met at least one of these criteria. Add-on and head-to-head designs were common and often used sparing of non-opioid or opioid rescue medication as a primary outcome measure. According to French national data, inguinal and penile surgeries were most frequent in ages 1 month to 2 years; abdominal and thoracic surgeries comprise approximately 75% of newborn surgeries. Analgesic trials with rescue sparing paradigm are currently sparse among children ages 0-2 years. Future trials could consider age-specific surgical procedures and use of add-on or head-to-head designs. IMPACT: Clinical trials of analgesic medications have been challenging in pediatrics, especially in the group from newborns to 2 years of age. Following an FDA-academic workshop, we analyzed features of completed analgesic trials in this age group. Studies using immediate rescue in placebo control, add-on, and head-to-head trial designs are pragmatic approaches that can provide important information regarding clinical effectiveness, side effects, and safety. Using a French national dataset with a granular profile of inpatient, outpatient, and short-stay surgeries, we provide information to future investigators on relative frequencies of different operations in neonates and through the first 2 years of life.

Digital Health Interventions and Patient Safety in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

Over the past 2 decades, several digital technology applications have been used to improve clinical outcomes after abdominal surgery. The extent to which these telemedicine interventions are associated with improved patient safety outcomes has not been assessed in systematic and meta-analytic reviews.

Objective

To estimate the implications of telemedicine interventions for complication and readmission rates in a population of patients with abdominal surgery.

Data Sources

PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were queried to identify relevant randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and nonrandomized studies published from inception through February 2023 that compared perioperative telemedicine interventions with conventional care and reported at least 1 patient safety outcome.

Study Selection

Two reviewers independently screened the titles and abstracts to exclude irrelevant studies as well as assessed the full-text articles for eligibility. After exclusions, 11 RCTs and 8 cohort studies were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis and 7 were included in the narrative review.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

Data were extracted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline and assessed for risk of bias by 2 reviewers. Meta-analytic estimates were obtained in random-effects models.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Number of complications, emergency department (ED) visits, and readmissions.

Results

A total of 19 studies (11 RCTs and 8 cohort studies) with 10 536 patients were included. The pooled risk ratio (RR) estimates associated with ED visits (RR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.65-0.94) and readmissions (RR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.58-0.78) favored the telemedicine group. There was no significant difference in the risk of complications between patients in the telemedicine and conventional care groups (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.77-1.43).

Conclusions and Relevance

Findings of this systematic review and meta-analysis suggest that perioperative telehealth interventions are associated with reduced risk of readmissions and ED visits after abdominal surgery. However, the mechanisms of action for specific types of abdominal surgery are still largely unknown and warrant further research.

Effectiveness and safety of self-pulling and latter transection reconstruction in totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy

Background

Laparoscopic right hemicolectomy is a standard treatment modality for right colon cancer. However, performing intracorporeal anastomosis (IA) for totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy (TLRH) remains a challenge for some surgeons. To simplify IA in TLRH we used self-pulling and latter transection (SPLT) reconstruction in TLRH, and compared this procedure with overlap IA and laparoscopy-assisted right hemicolectomy (LARH) in order to evaluate its safety and effectiveness.

Methods

Patients with right colon cancer who underwent SPLT-TLRH, TLRH with overlap IA or LARH between July 2019 and June 2023 were evaluated retrospectively. Basic information, oncological features, perioperative outcomes, and postoperative complications were compared between groups.

Results

In total, 188 patients with right colon cancer that underwent SPLT-TLRH (n = 60), TLRH(n=21) or LARH (n = 107) were included in the study. No patient required conversion to open surgery. The operation time in SPLT-TLRH group was significantly shorter than that in TLRH group (P<0.05). Compared with LARH group, SPLT-TLRH group had significantly longer distal margins, shorter skin incisions (P < 0.001), time to first flatus, time to first defecation, and postoperative hospital stays (P<0.05).

Conclusion

We introduced SPLT to TLRH. The SPLT-TLRH group demonstrated better short-term outcomes. Therefore, we believe that SPLT reconstruction is effective and safe in TLRH for right colon cancer, and can simplify reconstruction.

Accelerated enhanced recovery after colon cancer surgery with discharge within one day after surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated that accelerated enhanced recovery after colorectal surgery is feasible for specific patient populations. The accelerated enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) tend to vary, and the majority of studies included a small study population. This hampers defining the optimal protocol and establishing the potential benefits. This systematic review aimed to determine the effect of accelerated ERPs with intended discharge within one day after surgery.

METHODS

PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, Cochrane and Web of Science databases were searched using the following search terms: colon cancer, colon surgery, accelerated recovery, fast track recovery, enhanced recovery after surgery. Clinical trials published between January 2005 - February 2023, written in English or Dutch comparing accelerated ERPs to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) care for adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic or robotic surgery for colon cancer were eligible for inclusion.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies, including one RCT were included. Accelerated ERPs after colorectal surgery was possible as LOS was shorter; 14 h to 3.4 days, and complication rate varied from 0-35.7% and readmission rate was 0-17% in the accelerated ERP groups. Risk of bias was serious or critical in most of the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Accelerated ERPs may not yet be considered the new standard of care as the current data is heterogenous, and data on important outcome measures is scarce. Nonetheless, the decreased LOS suggests that accelerated recovery is possible for selected patients. In addition, the complication and readmission rates were comparable to ERAS care, suggesting that accelerated recovery could be safe.

An evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program for patients undergoing colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol reduces surgery-related stress and hospital stays for complicated surgical patients. It speeds recovery, reduces readmissions, and lowers morbidity and mortality. However, the efficacy of ERAS in colorectal surgery is still debatable.

Aim

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the ERAS program for patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

Material and methods

PRISMA-compliant searches were performed on Medline, Embase, PubMed, the Web of Sciences, and the Cochrane Database up to March 2023. The included articles compared ERAS protocol results for colorectal surgery patients to those of conventional care. RevMan was used for the meta-analysis, and the Cochrane RoB Tool was used to assess the study quality.

Results

The meta-analysis included 12 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1920 participants. There were 880 individuals in ERAS care and 1002 in conventional care. Weighted mean difference: -1.07 days, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.53 to -0.60, p = 0.00001), overall length of stay: -4.12 days, 95% CI: -5.86 to -2.38, p = 0.00001), and post-operative hospital stay: -1.91 days, 95% CI: -4.73 to -0.91, p = 0.00001). Readmissions were higher in the ERAS group than in the normal care group (odds ratio (OR) = 1.20, 95% CI: 0.82 to 1.75, p = 0.35). Post-operative complications were lower in the ERAS care group (OR = 0.42; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.65, p < 0.0001) and SSIs (OR = 0.75; 95% CI 0.52 to 1.08, p = 0.00001) than in the routine care group.

Conclusions

Care provided in line with the ERAS protocol has been shown to be successful and beneficial for patients following colorectal surgery, because it minimizes post-operative problems and length of hospital stay, and improves outcomes.

Development of a conceptual framework to detect perioperative symptom burden following abdominal surgery for cancer

BACKGROUND

Abdominal surgery for gastrointestinal malignancies has a significant impact on patients' health-related quality of life. However, there is so far no patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) in the immediate postoperative period to detect the perioperative symptom burden and patients' needs which may precede occult and severe complications. The aim of the study was to create a conceptual framework for the development of a PROM to measure perioperative symptom burden in abdominal cancer patients.

METHODS

This mixed method study was performed between March 2021, and July 2021 as part of a multiphase approach to develop a new PROM. A systematic review of the literature was performed health domains were identified. The relevance of the health domains was assessed in a two-round Delphi study with clinical experts. Qualitative interviews were performed in patients who underwent abdominal surgery for cancer.

RESULTS

The systematic literature review yielded 12 different PROM with 168 items and 55 health domains. The most common health domains involved the "digestive system" and "pain". In total, 30 patients (median age 66 years, 20 men [60%]) were included for qualitative patient interviews. Of 16 health domains identified by the Delphi study, a total 15 health domains were confirmed during patients' interviews. The final conceptual framework included 20 health domains.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the essential groundwork to develop and validate a new PROM for the immediate postoperative period of patients undergoing abdominal surgery for cancer.

Laparoscopic versus open surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma: a multicenter propensity score analysis of short- term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery (LS) has been increasingly applied in perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA). In this study, we intend to compare the short-term outcomes of LS versus open operation (OP) for pCCA in a multicentric practice in China.

METHODS

This real-world analysis included 645 pCCA patients receiving LS and OP at 11 participating centers in China between January 2013 and January 2019. A comparative analysis was performed before and after propensity score matching (PSM) in LS and OP groups, and within Bismuth subgroups. Univariate and multivariate models were performed to identify significant prognostic factors of adverse surgical outcomes and postoperative length of stay (LOS).

RESULTS

Among 645 pCCAs, 256 received LS and 389 received OP. Reduced hepaticojejunostomy (30.89% vs 51.40%, P = 0.006), biliary plasty requirement (19.51% vs 40.16%, P = 0.001), shorter LOS (mean 14.32 vs 17.95 d, P < 0.001), and lower severe complication (CD ≥ III) (12.11% vs. 22.88%, P = 0.006) were observed in the LS group compared with the OP group. Major postoperative complications such as hemorrhage, biliary fistula, abdominal abscess, and hepatic insufficiency were similar between LS and OP (P > 0.05 for all). After PSM, the short-term outcomes of two surgical methods were similar, except for shorter LOS in LS compared with OP (mean 15.19 vs 18.48 d, P = 0.0007). A series subgroup analysis demonstrated that LS was safe and had advantages in shorting LOS.

CONCLUSION

Although the complex surgical procedures, LS generally seems to be safe and feasible for experienced surgeons.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT05402618 (date of first registration: 02/06/2022).

Same-day discharge (SDD) vs standard enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols for major colorectal surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are well-established, resulting in improved outcomes and shorter length of hospital stay (LOS). Same-day discharge (SDD), or "hyper-ERAS", is a natural progression of ERAS. This systematic review aims to compare the safety and efficacy of SDD against conventional ERAS in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

The protocol was prospectively registered in PROSPERO (394793). A systematic search was performed in major databases to identify relevant articles, and a narrative systematic review was performed. Primary outcomes were readmission rates and length of hospital stay (LOS). Secondary outcomes were operative time and blood loss, postoperative pain, morbidity, nausea or vomiting, and patient satisfaction. Risks of bias was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included, with five single-arm and eight comparative studies, of which one was a randomised controlled trial. This comprised a total of 38,854 patients (SDD: 1622; ERAS: 37,232). Of the 1622 patients on the SDD pathway, 1590 patients (98%) were successfully discharged within 24 h of surgery. While most studies had an overall low risk of bias, there was considerable variability in inclusion criteria, types of surgery or anaesthesia, and discharge criteria. SDD resulted in a significantly reduced postoperative LOS, without increasing risk of 30-day readmission. Intraoperative blood loss and postoperative morbidity rates were comparable between both groups. Operative duration was shorter in the SDD group. Patient-reported satisfaction was high in the SDD cohort.

CONCLUSION

SDD protocols appear to be safe and feasible in selected patients undergoing major colorectal operations. Randomised controlled trials are necessary to further substantiate these findings.

Patient reported satisfaction levels with the use of telemedicine for general surgery-A systematic review of randomized control trials

Background

As healthcare continues to evolve in the wake of COVID-19 pandemic, surgeons are presented with the opportunity to integrate telemedicine into healthcare in tandem with in-person consultations. We aimed to perform a systematic review of randomized controlled trials to assess patient satisfaction with telemedicine interventions in general surgery.

Methods

A systematic review was performed in accordance to the PRISMA guidelines. Randomized control trials (RCTs) were included. The risk of bias 2.0 assessment was used to determine potential bias.

Results

In total, 11 prospective, randomized trials involving 1,598 patients (mean age: 49.1 years) were included. Overall 45.5% (5/11) of the trials compared videoconferencing or telephone follow up to traditional in person follow up. Three studies used smart technologies which include activity tracking devices in combination with a website and mobile application (27.3%). The other 3 interventions involved accelerated discharge on post operative day (POD) 1 with tele videoconferencing on POD 2, Post-operative daily text messages with education videos and video calling capability, and supportive text messages post-operatively. Telemedicine was shown to provide similar levels of patient satisfaction compared to controls in all 11 included RCTs.

Conclusion

Patient reported satisfaction with the use of telemedicine is similar to standard of care models in general surgery. With several shortcomings confounding the results in support of telemedicine, further experimentation with telemedicine interventions will likely improve patient reported satisfaction with using telemedicine for peroperative surgical care.

Clinical practice guidelines for enhanced recovery after colon and rectal surgery from the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) are dedicated to ensuring high-quality innovative patient care for surgical patients by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus as well as minimally invasive surgery. The ASCRS and SAGES society members involved in the creation of these guidelines were chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery and enhanced recovery. This consensus document was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus and develop clinical practice guidelines based on the best available evidence. While not proscriptive, these guidelines provide information on which decisions can be made and do not dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, healthcare workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. These guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care nor exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all the circumstances presented by the individual patient. This clinical practice guideline represents a collaborative effort between the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) and was approved by both societies.

Tolerating clear fluids diet on postoperative day 0 predicts early recovery of gastrointestinal function after laparoscopic colectomy

INTRODUCTION

A high proportion of colorectal surgery patients within an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP) do not experience complications but remain hospitalized mainly waiting for gastrointestinal (GI) recovery. Accurate identification of these patients may allow discharge prior to the return of GI function. Therefore, the objective of this study is to determine if tolerating clear fluid (CF) on postoperative day (POD) 0 was associated with uncomplicated return of GI function after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

Pooled data from three prospective studies from a single specialist colorectal referral center were analyzed (2013-2019). The present study included adult patients that underwent elective laparoscopic colectomy without stoma. Postoperative GI symptoms were collected daily in all three datasets. The main exposure variable, whether CF diet was tolerated on POD0, was defined as patients drinking at least 300 mL of CF without any nausea, anti-emetics, or vomiting (CF+ vs CF-). The main outcome measure was time to GI-3 (tolerating solid diet and passage of gas or stools).

RESULTS

A total of 221 patients were included in this study, including 69% CF+ and 31% CF-. The groups were similar in age, gender, and comorbidities, but the CF- patients were more likely to have surgery for inflammatory bowel disease. CF+ patients had faster time to GI-3 (mean 1.6d (SD 0.7) vs. 2.3d (SD 1.5), p < 0.001). The CF+ group also experienced fewer complications (19% vs. 35%, p = 0.009), shorter mean LOS (mean 3.6d (SD 2.9) vs. 6.2d (SD 9.4), p = 0.002), and were more likely to be discharged by the target LOS (66% vs. 50%, p = 0.024).

CONCLUSION

Toleration of CF on POD0 was associated with faster return of GI function, fewer complications, and shorter LOS. This may be used as a criteria for potential discharge prior to full return of GI function after laparoscopic colectomy within an ERP.

Accelerated 23-h enhanced recovery protocol for colon surgery: the CHASE-study

The introduction of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program has radically improved postoperative outcomes in colorectal surgery. Optimization of ERAS program to an accelerated recovery program may further improve these said outcomes. This single-center, prospective study investigated the feasibility and safety of a 23-h accelerated enhanced recovery protocol (ERP) for colorectal cancer patients (ASA I-II) undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery. The 23-h accelerated ERP consisted of adjustments in pre-, peri- and postoperative care; this was called the CHASE-protocol. This group was compared to a retrospective cohort of colorectal cancer patients who received standard ERAS care. Patients were discharged within 23 h after surgery if they met the discharge criteria. Primary outcome was the rate of the successful discharge within 23 h. Successful discharge within the CHASE-cohort was realized in 33 out of the 41 included patients (80.5%). Compared to the retrospective cohort (n = 75), length of stay was significantly shorter in the CHASE-cohort (p = 0.000), and the readmission rate was higher (p = 0.051). Complication rate was similar, severe complications were observed less frequently in the CHASE-cohort (4.9% vs. 8.0%). Findings from this study support the feasibility and safety of the accelerated 23-h accelerated ERP with the CHASE-protocol in selected patients.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Directed Surgical Decision Making for Lateral Pelvic Lymph Node Dissection in Rectal Cancer After Total Neoadjuvant Therapy (TNT)

OBJECTIVE

Lateral pelvic lymph node (LPLN) metastases are an important cause of preventable local failure in rectal cancer. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical and oncological outcomes following magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-directed surgical selection for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) after total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT).

METHODS

A retrospective consecutive cohort analysis was performed of rectal cancer patients with enlarged LPLN on pretreatment MRI. Patients were categorized as LPLND or non-LPLND. The main outcomes were lateral local recurrence rate, perioperative and oncological outcomes and factors associated with decision making for LPLND.

RESULTS

A total of 158 patients with enlarged pretreatment LPLN and treated with TNT were identified. Median follow-up was 20 months (interquartile range 10-32). After multidisciplinary review, 88 patients (56.0%) underwent LPLND. Mean age was 53 (SD±12) years, and 54 (34.2%) were female. Total operative time (509 vs 429 minutes; P =0.003) was greater in the LPLND group, but median blood loss ( P =0.70) or rates of major morbidity (19.3% vs 17.0%) did not differ. LPLNs were pathologically positive in 34.1%. The 3-year lateral local recurrence rates (3.4% vs 4.6%; P =0.85) did not differ between groups. Patients with LPLNs demonstrating pretreatment heterogeneity and irregular margin (odds ratio, 3.82; 95% confidence interval: 1.65-8.82) or with short-axis ≥5 mm post-TNT (odds ratio 2.69; 95% confidence interval: 1.19-6.08) were more likely to undergo LPLND.

CONCLUSIONS

For rectal cancer patients with evidence of LPLN metastasis, the appropriate selection of patients for LPLND can be facilitated by a multidisciplinary MRI-directed approach with no significant difference in perioperative or oncologic outcomes.

The remarkably frequent use of EQ-5D in non-economic research

INTRODUCTION

EQ-5D is an instrument which has been utilized for a variety of purposes, including in health-economic appraisals as an input into quality-adjusted life year (QALY) calculations. Indeed, it is the most-widely applied instrument for health-economic appraisal worldwide, and is recommended for use in QALY calculations by many national Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies. There is also a growing body of evidence for its usefulness in a variety of settings other than economic appraisals, but such use has not been well-documented. This study addresses this issue and documents how EQ-5D has been applied in both the non-economic and economic contexts.

METHODS

The PubMed database was searched using the terms 'EQ-5D', 'EQ-5D AND cost', and 'EQ-5D AND cost AND QALY' from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2019. We concentrated on 2019 publications for more detailed analyses. All the data collected for 2019 were downloaded and collected in EndNote. For 2019 only, we classified economic and non-economic use based on the inclusion of 'cost'. We also checked by manual inspection whether the search terms were suitable in correctly identifying economic and non-economic use. Variants of the non-economic use of EQ-5D were classified as follows: (a) as a quality of life outcome measure; (b) as a tool for methodological research; (c) methodological issues of EQ-5D itself; (d) comparisons with other quality of life questionnaires; (e) mapping studies; (f) value sets; (g) alongside costs but no QALY calculated; and (h) other.

RESULTS

The first publication found was from 1990. Up to and including 2019, 10,817 publications were identified, of which more than two in three did not contain any reference to costs or QALYs. In 2019, a total of 1409 manuscripts were identified, of which 239 were specifically for EQ-5D-5L.  Four hundred and seven (28.9%) included some form of 'costs' and 157 (11.1%) both 'costs' AND 'QALYs' terms. For EQ-5D-5L, the corresponding numbers were 104 (43.5%) and 29 (12.1%), respectively. After manually checking all the 1409 papers, three were duplicated records, which were omitted. In the remaining 1406 papers, only 40 (2.8%) contained the term 'cost', but not 'cost per QALY', and only 117 (8.3%) were identifiable as economic evaluations using the term 'cost per QALY'. Most non-economic use of EQ-5D was as a quality-of-life outcome measure (72.8%). Other applications were: as a tool for methodological research (6.7%); comparison studies (3.7%); EQ-5D methodological issues (3.5%); containing costs but not QALYs (2.8%); mapping (1.3%); value sets (0.4%); and other papers (0.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of the studies retrieved, covering a wide variety of research areas, reported upon the non-economic use of EQ-5D. Despite being the most-used instrument worldwide for QALY calculations, economic appraisal accounted for only a small, but important, part of published use.

Adoption of Telemedicine for Postoperative Follow-Up After Inpatient Cancer-Related Surgery

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant changes in health care delivery, including the rapid adoption of telemedicine across multiple specialties and practice environments. This includes postoperative visits (POV), despite limited data on outcomes following these telemedicine POV. We sought to determine whether these types of visits successfully identify and address postoperative complications when compared with in-person POV.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective inpatient cancer-related surgery from March 2020 through December 2020. The exposure variable was type of POV (telemedicine v in-person). The primary outcome was unplanned hospital readmission within 90 days, and secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission, length of stay of first readmission, and mortality.

RESULTS

Five-hundred thirty-five patients underwent elective inpatient operations and met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 98 (18.5%) had an initial telemedicine POV. There was no difference in 90-day readmission on the basis of POV type (16.3% telemedicine v 16.5% in-person, P = .99). Reasons for readmission did not differ between patients who underwent a telemedicine POV compared with in-person POV (all P > .05). After adjustment for patients' demographic and clinical factors, telemedicine POV was not associated with 90-day readmission (odds ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.70; P = .77).

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine POV use adopted during the COVID-19 pandemic did not increase risk of readmission when compared with in-person visits following inpatient oncologic surgery. These data can help inform policy on the continued use and application of telemedicine after the pandemic.

Recommendations for the Design and Delivery of Transitions-Focused Digital Health Interventions: Rapid Review

Background

Older adults experience a high risk of adverse events during hospital-to-home transitions. Implementation barriers have prevented widespread clinical uptake of the various digital health technologies that aim to support hospital-to-home transitions.

Objective

To guide the development of a digital health intervention to support transitions from hospital to home (the Digital Bridge intervention), the specific objectives of this review were to describe the various roles and functions of health care providers supporting hospital-to-home transitions for older adults, allowing future technologies to be more targeted to support their work; describe the types of digital health interventions used to facilitate the transition from hospital to home for older adults and elucidate how these interventions support the roles and functions of providers; describe the lessons learned from the design and implementation of these interventions; and identify opportunities to improve the fit between technology and provider functions within the Digital Bridge intervention and other transition-focused digital health interventions.

Methods

This 2-phase rapid review involved a selective review of providers’ roles and their functions during hospital-to-home transitions (phase 1) and a structured literature review on digital health interventions used to support older adults’ hospital-to-home transitions (phase 2). During the analysis, the technology functions identified in phase 2 were linked to the provider roles and functions identified in phase 1.

Results

In phase 1, various provider roles were identified that facilitated hospital-to-home transitions, including navigation-specific roles and the roles of nurses and physicians. The key transition functions performed by providers were related to the 3 categories of continuity of care (ie, informational, management, and relational continuity). Phase 2, included articles (n=142) that reported digital health interventions targeting various medical conditions or groups. Most digital health interventions supported management continuity (eg, follow-up, assessment, and monitoring of patients’ status after hospital discharge), whereas informational and relational continuity were the least supported. The lessons learned from the interventions were categorized into technology- and research-related challenges and opportunities and informed several recommendations to guide the design of transition-focused digital health interventions.

Conclusions

This review highlights the need for Digital Bridge and other digital health interventions to align the design and delivery of digital health interventions with provider functions, design and test interventions with older adults, and examine multilevel outcomes.

International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045596

Comparison of clinical efficacy and postoperative inflammatory response between laparoscopic and open radical resection of colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

In recent years, the incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) has increased annually, which has seriously threatened the health and quality of life of patients. In the treatment of CRC, both laparoscopic and radical resection are widely used.

AIM

To explore and discuss clinical efficacy and postoperative inflammatory response of laparoscopic and open radical resection of CRC.

METHODS

A total of 96 patients with CRC diagnosed in our hospital from March 2016 to April 2021 were selected, and were divided into the study group (n = 48) and control group (n = 48) using a simple random method. The control group was treated with open radical resection of CRC, and the study group was treated with laparoscopic radical resection of CRC. The perioperative conditions (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, the recovery time of gastrointestinal function, number of lymph node dissections and length of hospital stay), inflammatory response index levels [interleukin (IL)-6, IL-8, IL-10, C-reactive protein (CRP)] before and after operation, pain stress response indices [levels of neuropeptide (NPY), prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT)], and the incidence of the complications between the two groups were counted.

RESULTS

The operation time in the study group was (186.18 ± 33.54 min), which was longer than that of the control group (129.38 ± 26.83 min), but the intraoperative blood loss (111.34 ± 21.45 mL), recovery time of gastrointestinal function (25.35 ± 4.55 h), and hospital stay (10.09 ± 2.38 d) were better than those in the control group (163.77 ± 32.41 mL, 36.06 ± 7.13 h, 13.51 ± 3.66 d) (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in the number of lymph node dissections between the study group (15.19 ± 3.04) and the control group (16.20 ± 2.98) (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the levels of serum IL-6 (9.79 ± 4.11 ng/mL), IL-8 (3.79 ± 1.71 ng/L), IL-10 (48.96 ± 12.51 ng/L) and CRP (7.98 ± 2.33 mg/L) in the study group and the control group (10.56 ± 3.78 ng/mL, 4.08 ± 1.45 ng/L, 50.13 ± 11.67 ng/L, 8.29 ± 2.60 mg/L) before the operation (P > 0.05). After the operation, there was no significant difference between the levels of serum IL-6 (19.11 ± 6.68 ng/mL). There was no significant difference in serum NPY (109.79 ± 13.46 UG/L), PGE2 (269.54 ± 37.34 ng/L), 5-HT (151.70 ± 18.86 ng/L) between the study group and the control group (113.29 ± 15.01 UG/L, 273.91 ± 40.04 ng/L, 148.85 ± 20.45 ng/L) before the operation (P > 0.05). The incidence of the complications in the study group (4.17%) was lower than that of the control group (18.75%) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic radical resection of CRC can reduce surgical trauma, inflammatory response and pain stress caused by surgery, which shortens rehabilitation of patients, with a low incidence of complications.

Effectiveness of care transition strategies for colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Implementing effective strategies to transition care for individuals with colorectal cancer is an important tool to qualify care for affected individuals, as well as contribute to the dispensation of continuous and quality care to patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of strategies to transition from hospital care to the community compared to usual care for colorectal cancer patients to reduce hospital stay, readmissions at 30 days, and visit to the emergency department up to 30 days.

METHOD

Systematic review and meta-analysis followed the recommendations of PRISMA statement, with protocol registered in PROSPERO (CRD 42,020,162,249). Searches were carried out in May 2020 in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, LILACS, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model. The measure of effect used for dichotomous outcomes was relative risk, and for continuous outcomes, the difference of means was used, with their confidence intervals of 95%. Heterogeneity was evaluated using inconsistency statistics.

RESULTS

Of 631 identified studies, seven studies were included. The meta-analysis of the studies showed a reduction in readmissions at 30 days of 32% and a significant reduction in hospital stay time of approximately one and a half days, both of which were analyzed in favor of the group of care transition interventions.

CONCLUSION

The findings showed effective care transition strategies for the transition of colorectal cancer patients, such as post-discharge active surveillance program, standardized protocol of improved recovery, and telephone follow-up.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42020162249.

Postoperative complications after robotic resection of colorectal cancer: An analysis based on 5-year experience at a large-scale center

BACKGROUND

As a common gastrointestinal malignancy, colorectal cancer (CRC) poses a serious health threat globally. Robotic surgery is one of the future trends in surgical treatment of CRC. Robotic surgery has several technical advantages over laparoscopic surgery, including 3D visualization, elimination of the fulcrum effect, and better ergonomic positioning, which together lead to better surgical outcomes and faster recovery. However, analysis of independent factors of postoperative complications after robotic surgery is still insufficient.

AIM

To analyze the incidence and risk factors for postoperative complications after robotic surgery in patients with CRC.

METHODS

In total, 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgical resection for CRC between May 2015 and May 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Postoperative complications were categorized according to the Clavien-Dindo (C-D) classification, and possible risk factors were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 1040 patients who had undergone robotic surgery for CRC, the overall, severe, local, and systemic complication rates were 12.2%, 2.4%, 8.8%, and 3.5%, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score (P = 0.006) were independent risk factors for overall complications. Multivariate analysis identified multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and comorbidities (P = 0.029) as independent risk factors for severe complications (C-D grade III or higher). Regarding local complications, multiple organ resection (P = 0.002) and multiple bowel resection (P = 0.027) were independent risk factors. Multiple organ resection (P < 0.001) and level III ASA score (P = 0.007) were independent risk factors for systemic complications. Additionally, sigmoid colectomy had a lower incidence of overall complications (6.4%; P = 0.006) and local complications (4.7%; P = 0.028) than other types of colorectal surgery.

CONCLUSION

Multiple organ resection, level III ASA score, comorbidities, and multiple bowel resection were risk factors for postoperative complications, with multiple organ resection being the most likely.

Trajectory of gastrointestinal function after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway

BACKGROUND

Early identification of colorectal surgery patients predicted to have uneventful gastrointestinal recovery may allow for early discharge. Our objective was to identify trajectories of gastrointestinal recovery within a colorectal surgery enhanced recovery pathway.

METHODS

Data from 2 prospective studies enrolling adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection at a specialist colorectal referral center were analyzed (2013-2019). All patients were managed according to a mature enhanced recovery pathway with a 3-day target length of stay. Postoperative gastrointestinal symptoms were collected daily and expressed using the validated I-FEED score. Latent-class growth curve (trajectory) analysis was used to identify different I-FEED trajectories over the first 3 postoperative days.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients were analyzed. Trajectory analysis identified 3 distinct trajectories: trajectory 1 had no gastrointestinal symptoms (41%); trajectory 2 had mild early symptoms with improvement over time (48%); and trajectory 3 had gastrointestinal symptoms that significantly worsened between postoperative days 1 and 2 (11%). I-FEED score ≤1 on postoperative day 1 predicted trajectory 1. Trajectory 1 had the best clinical outcomes, whereas trajectory 3 had the worst.

CONCLUSION

I-FEED trajectory over postoperative days 1-3 was associated with clinical outcomes and may be used to predict gastrointestinal recovery. Findings from this study may inform clinical decision making regarding early hospital discharge within colorectal enhanced recovery pathways.

iColon, a patient-focused mobile application for perioperative care in colorectal surgery: an observational, real-world study protocol

INTRODUCTION

The enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol provides optimised care guidelines for patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. To ensure high compliance with active ERAS elements, patients must be educated to actively participate in the perioperative care pathway. Mobile health is a rapidly expanding area of the digital health sector that is effective in educating and engaging patients during follow-up. iColon is a mobile application designed by the Operative Unit of General Surgery of IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital of Negrar of Valpolicella, which is specifically targeted at patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. iColon is organised into ERAS phases, and it provides real-time feedback to surgeons about a patient's adherence to perioperative active ERAS elements.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We hypothesise that by providing a patient-focused mobile application, compliance with active ERAS elements could be improved.The first coprimary objective is to build patient confidence in using the mobile application, iColon, during perioperative care. The second coprimary objective is to establish patient compliance with active ERAS elements.Secondary objectives include examining: length of stay, 30-day readmission rate, postoperative complications and patient satisfaction of received care.This study is a prospective observational real-world study of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery who are following the ERAS protocol and using iColon during perioperative periods between September 2020 and December 2022.By educating and engaging patients in the ERAS protocol, the mobile application, iColon, should stimulate patients to be more proactive in managing their healthcare by complying more closely with active ERAS elements.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the local Ethics Committee with the protocol number 29219 of 25 May 2020. The results will be actively disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations and various community engagement activities.

Propensity score-matched comparison between totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transcolonic natural orifice specimen extraction and conventional laparoscopic surgery with mini-laparotomy in the treatment of ascending colon cancer (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Now that the debate about the safety and effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open surgery is over, attention has turned to innovations that can verify whether minimizing the impact of laparoscopy on the abdominal wall can further reduce pain, improve patient comfort, lead to superior cosmesis, and reduce morbidity. The aim of this study was to further explore the application value of totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transcolonic natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) and to evaluate the short-term efficacy of transcolonic NOSE surgery for resecting specimens of ascending colon cancer.

METHODS

From January 2016 to May 2017, a retrospective study was conducted in Guangxi. Propensity score matching was used to minimize the bias from nonrandomized treatment assignment. Patients were followed up through May 2020.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients underwent totally laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transcolonic NOSE and 116 patients laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with mini-laparotomy (ML) procedures at our institution. After propensity score matching, each group included 45 patients, and all covariate imbalances were alleviated. The transcolonic NOSE group and the ML group did not differ significantly in terms of baseline clinical characteristics. The transcolonic NOSE group was associated with a shorter time to first flatus (NOSE vs ML: 1.8 ± .5 vs 3.2 ± .8, P = .032), a shorter length of hospital stay (11.3 ± 2.5 days vs 13.0 ± 3.1 days, P = .034), a shorter time to first liquid intake (2.6 ± .8 vs 3.8 ± .9, P = .068), less pain (1.8 ± .8 vs 4.2 ± .7, P = .013), less analgesia requirement (6 [13.3%] vs 21 [46.7%], P = .001), and lower C-reactive protein levels on postoperative day 1 (3.6 ± 1.7 vs 8.2 ± 2.2, P = .001) and postoperative day 3 (NOSE 2.4 ± 1.4 vs M: 4.6 ± 1.7 [P = .013]) than the ML group. The median follow-up was 28.4 months (interquartile range, 18.0-36.0). The 3-year overall survival rates were similar between the transcolonic NOSE group and the ML group.

CONCLUSIONS

In total, laparoscopic right hemicolectomy with transcolonic specimen extraction appears to be safe for selected patients with ascending colon cancer as a minimally invasive surgery.

Do postoperative telemedicine interventions with a communication feature reduce emergency department visits and readmissions?-a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Emergency department (ED) visits and readmissions after surgery are common and represent a significant cost-burden on the healthcare system. A notable portion of these unplanned visits are the result of expected complications or normal recovery after surgery, suggesting that improved coordination and communication in the outpatient setting could potentially prevent these. Telemedicine can improve patient-physician communication and as such may have a role in limiting unplanned emergency department visits and readmissions in postoperative patients.

METHODS

Major electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials and cohort studies in surgical patients examining the effect of postoperative telemedicine interventions with a communication feature on 30-day readmissions and emergency department visits as compared to current standard postoperative follow-up. All surgical subspecialties were included. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility, extracted data, and evaluated risk of bias using standardized tools. Our primary outcomes of interest were 30-day ED visits and readmissions. Our secondary outcomes were patient satisfaction with the intervention.

RESULTS

29 studies were included in the final analysis. Fourteen studies were RCTs, and the remaining fifteen were cohort studies. Eighteen studies reported 30-day ED visit as an outcome. There was no overall reduction in 30-day ED visit in the telemedicine group (RR: 0.89, 95%CI: 0.70-1.12). Twenty-two studies reported 30-day readmission as an outcome. The overall pooled estimate did not show a difference in this outcome (RR: 0.90, 95%CI: 0.74-1.09). Fifteen studies reported a metric of patient satisfaction regarding utilization of the telemedicine intervention. All studies demonstrated high levels of satisfaction (> 80%) with the telemedicine intervention.

DISCUSSION

This review fails to demonstrate a clear reduction ED visits and readmissions to support use of a telemedicine intervention across the board. This may be in part explained by significant heterogeneity in the proportions of potentially preventable visits in each surgical specialty. As such, targeting interventions to specific surgical settings may prove most useful.

Assessing the immediate impact of COVID-19 on surgical oncology practice: Experience from an NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Center in the Northeastern United States

Background

The effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic on surgical oncology practice are not yet quantified. The aim of this study was to measure the immediate impact of COVID‐19 on surgical oncology practice volume.

Methods

A retrospective study of patients treated at an NCI‐Comprehensive Cancer Center was performed. “Pre‐COVID” era was defined as January–February 2020 and “COVID” as March–April 2020. Primary outcomes were clinic visits and operative volume by surgical oncology subspecialty.

Results

Abouyt 907 new patient visits, 3897 follow‐up visits, and 644 operations occurred during the study period. All subspecialties experienced significant decreases in new patient visits during COVID, though soft tissue oncology (Mel/Sarc), gynecologic oncology (Gyn/Onc), and endocrine were disproportionately affected. Telehealth visits increased to 11.4% of all visits by April. Mel/Sarc, Gyn/Onc, and Breast experienced significant operative volume decreases during COVID (25.8%, p = 0.012, 43.6% p < 0.001, and 41.9%, p < 0.001, respectively), while endocrine had no change and gastrointestinal oncology had a slight increase (p = 0.823) in the number of cases performed.

Conclusions

The effects of the COVID‐19 pandemic are wide‐ranging within surgical oncology subspecialties. The addition of telehealth is a viable avenue for cancer patient care and should be considered in surgical oncology practice.

Digital tools for ambulatory surgery patient surveillance and beyond…

Management of patients in ambulatory (or short stay) surgery relies on optimal organisation of the health care pathways and specific anesthesiology and surgical protocols. Postoperative medico-surgical complications can occur undetected by traditional hospital surveillance. This article identifies modern digital means that can be adapted to surveillance of patients at home: telephone calls or teleconferences, automatic messaging, mobile phone applications, Web platforms and other e-connected devices. For each, we detail their advantages and their limitations.

Non-Doppler hemorrhoidal artery ligation and hemorrhoidopexy combined with pudendal nerve block for the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In this study, we proposed a combined outpatient treatment modality for hemorrhoidal disease.

METHODS

This study was a prospective non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (RCT). The experimental group included the dearterialization and hemorrhoidopexy under pudendal nerve block, whereas the comparator consisted of the standard Doppler guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation and hemorrhoidopexy, under spinal anesthesia. As primary hypothesis, we considered the non-inferiority of the proposed modality in terms of the presenting symptom remission rate (non-inferiority margin: 10%). Randomization was based on a 1:1 ratio. Blinding was confined to the patient and the investigator.

RESULTS

Overall, 60 patients were enrolled. The primary hypothesis of this RCT (96.7% vs 73.3%) was validated. The experimental group was associated with a lower operation duration and an expedited onset of mobilization and feeding. Moreover, a favorable profile regarding short-term morbidity and analgesia was identified. The control group displayed a higher pile recurrence rate and a suboptimal patient satisfaction. A significant effect of the treatment modality in most of the SF-36 components was confirmed.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed treatment modality was associated with favorable short and long-term outcomes. Due to specific limitations, further RCTs, with a larger sample size, are required. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03298997.

The Effect of an Enhanced Recovery Program on Elective Right Hemicolectomies for Crohn's Disease vs. Colon Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are widely employed in colorectal surgery, successful in reducing postoperative morbidities and hospital length of stay (LOS). However, ERAS effects on the inflammatory bowel disease population remain unclear. This study examines the postoperative course of both Crohn's disease (CD) and colon cancer (CC) patients after elective right hemicolectomies and compares the effectiveness of ERAS protocol.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on patients with CD and CC undergoing elective right hemicolectomies and ileocecectomies from January 2014 through June 2016 (pre-ERAS) and January 2017 through April 2019 (post-ERAS) from a single tertiary care center. Patient demographics and perioperative variables were examined, including prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI), hospital LOS, and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

98 CC patients and 91 CD patients met the inclusion criteria. The pre-ERAS CC and post-ERAS CC cohorts were significantly different: post-ERAS had fewer patients with congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and had higher albumin levels. The pre-ERAS CC cohort had significantly longer operative durations and higher rates of concomitant procedures than the post-ERAS CC cohort. Both patients with CC and CD had a reduction in LOS with implementation of ERAS, decreasing by 2.24 days (P = .002) and 1.21 days (P = .038), respectively. There was a reduction in rates of organ space infections with CD (pre .132, post .00, P = .007). There was a trend towards an increased rate of PPOI with CD (Pre .079, Post .226, P = .062).

DISCUSSION

The ERAS protocol significantly reduced LOS for both groups, without increasing 30-day readmission rates or other morbidities.

Robotic lateral pelvic lymph node dissection after chemoradiation for rectal cancer: a Western perspective

AIM

There are limited outcome data for lateral pelvic lymph node dissection (LPLND) following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT), particularly in the West. Our aim was to evaluate the short-term perioperative and oncological outcomes of robotic LPLND at a single cancer centre.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of a prospective database of consecutive patients undergoing robotic LPLND for rectal cancer between November 2012 and February 2020 was performed. The main outcomes were short-term perioperative and oncological outcomes. Major morbidity was defined as Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or above.

RESULTS

Forty patients underwent robotic LPLND during the study period. The mean age was 54 years (SD ± 15 years) and 13 (31.0%) were female. The median body mass index was 28.6 kg/m² (IQR 25.5-32.6 kg/m² ). Neoadjuvant CRT was performed in all patients. Resection of the primary rectal cancer and concurrent LPLND occurred in 36 (90.0%) patients, whilst the remaining 4 (10.0%) patients had subsequent LPLND after prior rectal resection. The median operating time was 420 min (IQR 313-540 min), estimated blood loss was 150 ml (IQR 55-200 ml) and length of hospital stay was 4 days (IQR 3-6 days). The major morbidity rate was 10.0% (n = 4). The median lymph node harvest from the LPLND was 6 (IQR 3-9) and 13 (32.5%) patients had one or more positive LPLNs. The median follow-up was 16 months (IQR 5-33 months), with 1 (2.5%) local central recurrence and 7 (17.5%) patients developing distant disease, resulting in 3 (7.5%) deaths.

CONCLUSION

Robotic LPLND for rectal cancer can be performed in Western patients to completely resect extra-mesorectal LPLNs and is associated with acceptable perioperative morbidity.

Safety of Surgical Telehealth in the Outpatient and Inpatient Setting

New telehealth platforms and interventions have proliferated over the past decade and will be further spurred by the COVID-19 pandemic. Emerging literature examines the efficacy and safety of these interventions. Early pilot studies and trials demonstrate equivalent outcomes of telehealth interventions that seek to replace routine postoperative care in low-risk patients who have undergone low-risk surgeries. Studies are underway to evaluate interventions in higher-risk populations undergoing more complex procedures. Tele-ICU platforms demonstrate promise to provide specialized, high-acuity care to underserved areas and may also be used to augment compliance with evidence-based protocols.

Robotic rectal cancer surgery: comparative study of the impact of obesity on early outcomes

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of robotic total mesorectal excision (TME) in obese versus non-obese patients. A total of 533 patients, of whom 161 were obese (30·2 per cent) underwent robotic proctectomy during the study interval. Patient obesity was not associated with adverse short-term clinical outcomes after robotic rectal cancer surgery. Indicated in the obese perhaps?

Maximization of Non-Opioid Multimodal Analgesia in Ambulatory Surgery Centers

Ambulatory surgery centers aid the healthcare system by not only providing a cost-effective option for delivery of care but also by helping to reduce overwhelming case volumes at inpatient facilities. While outpatient protocols have been designed for an increasing number of surgical procedures, the inpatient to outpatient transition of surgery remains limited by both procedure type and patient comorbidities. This limitation stems in part from the heavy emphasis on accelerated discharge following outpatient procedures, given that prolonged recovery time is associated with delayed turnover and increased nursing care demands. Since its inception, enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) has aimed to primarily reduce the disruption of physiologic homeostasis that occurs secondary to surgery. More recently, the aim of ERAS has evolved to help transition inpatient procedures to outpatient settings and may even be useful in more emergent cases. It should be noted, however, that outpatient surgery even in combination with ERAS is not the best option for all patients, and the use of ERAS protocols should be complemented with predictive assessments of patient risk. Beyond augmenting the efficiency of outpatient surgery, ERAS protocols, when used in eligible patients and especially when combined with regional anesthetic techniques, are effective in delivering opioid-sparing pain management while increasing overall outcomes and patient satisfaction rates.

The COVID-19 pandemic: considerations for resuming normal colorectal services

This European Society of Coloproctology guidance focuses on a proposed conceptual framework to resume standard service in colorectal surgery. The proposed conceptual framework is a schematic and stepwise approach including: in-depth assessment of damage to non-COVID-19-related colorectal service; the return of service (integration with the COVID-19-specific service and the existing operational continuity planning); safety arrangements in parallel with minimizing downtime; the required support for staff and patients; the aftermath of the pandemic and continued strategic planning. This will be dynamic guidance with ongoing updates using critical appraisal of emerging evidence. We will welcome input from all stakeholders (statutory organizations, healthcare professionals, public and patients). Any new questions, new data and discussion are welcome via https://www.escp.eu.com/guidelines.

Exploring Australian regional cancer patients' experiences of clinical trial participation via telemedicine technology

INTRODUCTION

Regional cancer patients face various barriers in accessing specialist cancer services. Teletrials are a new model of care that utilise telemedicine technology to enable access to and participation in clinical trials close to home. The present study aimed to explore the experiences of regional cancer patients and their carers while participating in a teletrial, and those of regional patients who travelled to a metropolitan centre for trial participation.

METHODS

A concurrent, mixed methods study design was used to address the study aim. Patient quality of life data were gathered for both groups and an audio-recorded semi-structured interview undertaken to explore patients' and carers' experiences of the two modes of trial participation. Greater weighting was given to the qualitative data.

RESULTS

Participants described teletrials as an acceptable and valuable initiative that reduced overall burden of trial participation. Irrespective of mode of delivery, patients and carers identified access to trials and specialist cancer services as an important equity issue for regional cancer patients.

DISCUSSION

From the perspective of regional cancer patients and carers, a teletrial offers convenient, acceptable access to a clinical trial. Although not all patients may want to engage in a teletrial, patients and carers agree that it offers equity of opportunity for trial participation, irrespective of where people live.