How often do patients return to the operating room after colorectal resections?

Outcomes Following Colorectal Cancer Surgeries at the Basildon and Thurrock University Hospital

Aim We reviewed surgical outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer resections in Basildon and Thurrock University Hospital between April 2019 and March 2020. Methods Clinical characteristics of 141 patients who underwent surgical resection for colorectal cancer at the district hospital were assessed and reported, including tumor site, disease stage, and type of surgical resection performed. We reviewed 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality, postoperative complications, return to the theater, and extended hospital stay data for these patients. The results of our review across measured outcomes were compared to the national average from the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA) Report. Results Clinical data and health outcomes for 141 patients with colorectal cancer resections within the index year were reviewed. The mean age at diagnosis was 68.9 (12.5) years. Among the patients, 61 (43.3%) were female, and 59 (41.8%) had Stage III and IV colorectal cancer. Around 95 (67.4%) had the colon as the primary tumor site, while 46 (32.6%) had the primary tumor site in the rectum. Of the patients, 17 (12.1%) had emergency surgeries, and 124 (87.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. Right hemicolectomy was the most common operation performed in 58 patients (41.1%). The average length of stay was 7.8 (6.6) days; the length of stay was similar for both colonic and rectal resections. Low 30-day and 90-day mortality rates of (1/141) 0.71% and (2/141) 1.4%, respectively, were observed compared to the 90-day United Kingdom (UK) national average mortality rate of 2.7% in 2019/20. Around 30 (21.3%) of the patients developed postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery. Only six out of 30 postoperative complications were classified as Clavien-Dindo Grade III. Conclusion Surgical outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer in our district general hospital are similar to or lower than the national averages estimated by NBOCA. To further strengthen surgical care delivery and improve patient outcomes in the United Kingdom, there is a need to improve surgical techniques and quality improvement processes.

Impact of hospital volume on failure to rescue for complications requiring reoperation after elective colorectal surgery: multicentre propensity score-matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

It has previously been reported that there are similar reoperation rates after elective colorectal surgery but higher failure-to-rescue (FTR) rates in low-volume hospitals (LVHs) versus high-volume hospitals (HVHs). This study assessed the effect of hospital volume on reoperation rate and FTR after reoperation following elective colorectal surgery in a matched cohort.

METHODS

Population-based retrospective multicentre cohort study of adult patients undergoing reoperation for a complication after an elective, non-centralized colorectal operation between 2006 and 2017 in 11 hospitals. Hospitals were divided into either HVHs (3 hospitals, median ≥126 resections per year) or LVHs (8 hospitals, <126 resections per year). Patients were propensity score-matched (PSM) for baseline characteristics as well as indication and type of elective surgery. Primary outcome was FTR.

RESULTS

A total of 6428 and 3020 elective colorectal resections were carried out in HVHs and LVHs, of which 217 (3.4%) and 165 (5.5%) underwent reoperation (P < 0.001), respectively. After PSM, 142 patients undergoing reoperation remained in both HVH and LVH groups for final analyses. FTR rate was 7.7% in HVHs and 10.6% in LVHs (P = 0.410). The median Comprehensive Complication Index was 21.8 in HVHs and 29.6 in LVHs (P = 0.045). There was no difference in median ICU-free days, length of stay, the risk for permanent ostomy or overall survival between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The reoperation rate and postoperative complication burden was higher in LVHs with no significant difference in FTR compared with HVHs.

Tailored Pre-Operative Antibiotic Prophylaxis to Prevent Post-Operative Surgical Site Infections in General Surgery

The average American today undergoes three inpatient and two outpatient surgical procedures during one's life, each of which carries with it a risk of post-operative infection. It has long been known that post-operative infections cause significant morbidity in the immediate peri-operative period, but recent evidence suggests that they can have long-term consequences as well, increasing a patient's risk of infectious complications in unrelated surgeries performed months or even years later. While there are several theories on the origin of this association, including bacterial colonization of a post-operative infectious wound site, antimicrobial resistance from curative courses of antibiotics, subclinical immunosuppression, or the creation of an inflammatory "pathobiome" following an infectious insult, it is ultimately still unclear why patients who experience a single post-operative infection seem to be at a significantly higher risk of experiencing subsequent ones. Regardless, this association has significant implications for the routine use of pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis. Indeed, while the prescription of antibiotics pre-operatively has dramatically reduced the rate of post-operative infections, the chosen prophylaxis regimens are typically standardized according to national guidelines, are facing increasing antimicrobial resistance patterns, and have been unable to reduce the risk of post-operative infection to acceptably low levels for certain surgeries. As a result, some clinicians have speculated that tailoring pre-operative antibiotic prophylaxis according to a patient's prior infectious and operative history could improve efficacy and further reduce the rate of post-operative infections. The purpose of this review is to describe the evidence for the link between multiple post-operative infections and explore the efficacy of individualized pre-operative prophylaxis.

Reoperation following urgent and emergent colectomy in the State of Michigan

BACKGROUND

Reoperation is associated with unfavorable outcomes and increased healthcare utilization. This study seeks to investigate the incidence and factors related to reoperation in patients undergoing urgent/emergent colectomies.

METHODS

The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) database was used to identify patients undergoing urgent/emergent colectomies. Outcomes and risk factors of patients who underwent reoperation within 30 days were compared to those who did not.

RESULTS

16,004 patients undergoing urgent/emergent colon resection were identified. Reoperation occurred in 12.4% and was associated with increased 30-day mortality (16.7% vs. 9.6%, p < .0001), median hospital length of stay (17 vs. 10 days, p < .0001), readmission rate (21.0% vs. 12.1%, p < .001), and discharge to a location other than home (62.3% vs. 36.8%, p < .0001). Reoperation rate was highest for vascular-related indications (23.5%), and was associated with several clinical factors (male gender, low albumin, ASA classification, and presence of pre-operative sepsis, dialysis or ventilator dependence) CONCLUSIONS: Reoperation following urgent/emergent colectomy occurs frequently. Additional study into strategies to reduce reoperations in this population is warranted.

"Relaparoscopy" to treat early complications following colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has shown clear benefits that could also be useful in the emergency setting such as early reoperations after colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and feasibility of laparoscopic reintervention ("relaparoscopy") (RL) to manage postoperative complications after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study based on a prospectively collected database from 2000 to 2019. Patients who required a reoperation after undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery were included. According to the approach used at the reoperation, the cohort was divided in laparoscopy (RL) and laparotomy (LPM). Demographics, hospital stay, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 159 patients underwent a reoperation after a laparoscopic colorectal surgery: 124 (78%) had RL and 35 (22%) LPM. Demographics were similar in both groups. Patients who underwent left colectomy were more frequently reoperated by laparoscopy (RL: 42.7% vs. LPM: 22.8%, p: 0.03). The most common finding at the reoperation was anastomotic leakage, which was treated more often by RL (RL: 67.7% vs. LPM: 25.7%, p: 0.0001), and the most common strategy was drainage and loop ileostomy (RL: 65.8% vs. LPM: 17.6%, p: 0.00001). Conversion was necessary in 12 patients (9.6%). Overall morbidity rate was 52.2%. Patients in the RL group had less postoperative severe complications (RL: 12.1% vs. LPM: 22.8, p: 0.01). Mortality rate was similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Relaparoscopy is feasible and safe for treating early postoperative complications, particularly anastomotic leakage after left colectomy.

Evaluation of intraoperative leak testing of small intestinal anastomoses performed by hand-sewn and stapled techniques in dogs: 131 cases (2008-2019)

OBJECTIVE

To compare the rate of postoperative dehiscence on the basis of intraoperative anastomotic leak test results (ie, positive or negative for leakage or testing not performed) between dogs that underwent hand-sewn anastomosis (HSA) or functional end-to-end stapled anastomosis (FEESA) of the small intestine.

ANIMALS

131 client-owned dogs that underwent 144 small intestinal anastomoses (94 FEESA and 50 HSA).

PROCEDURES

Medical records were searched to identify dogs that had undergone a small intestinal anastomosis (HSA or FEESA) from January 2008 through October 2019. Data were collected regarding signalment, indication for surgery, location of the anastomosis, surgical technique, the presence of preoperative septic peritonitis, performance of intraoperative leak testing, development of postoperative dehiscence, and duration of follow-up.

RESULTS

Intraoperative leak testing was performed during 62 of 144 (43.1%) small intestinal anastomoses, which included 26 of 94 (27.7%) FEESAs and 36 of 50 (72.0%) HSAs. Thirteen of 144 (9.0%) anastomoses underwent dehiscence after surgery (median, 4 days; range, 2 to 17 days), with subsequent septic peritonitis, including 10 of 94 (10.6%) FEESAs and 3 of 50 (6.0%) HSAs. The incidence of postoperative dehiscence was not significantly different between FEESAs and HSAs; between anastomoses that underwent intraoperative leak testing and those that did not, regardless of anastomotic technique; or between anastomoses with positive and negative leak test results. Hand-sewn anastomoses were significantly more likely to undergo leak testing than FEESAs. Preoperative septic peritonitis, use of omental or serosal reinforcement, preoperative serum albumin concentration, and surgical indication were not significantly different between anastomotic techniques.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Performance of intraoperative anastomotic leak testing, regardless of the anastomotic technique, was not associated with a reduction in the incidence of postoperative anastomotic dehiscence.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Re-operations Within 30 Days After Lower Gastrointestinal Tract Surgery: a Retrospective Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Re-operations within 30 days after lower gastrointestinal tract surgery are associated to high morbidity and mortality. Laparoscopic approach has been reported as feasible and safe in selected patients, but comparative data to laparotomy are scarce. The aim of this study was to review our experience in laparoscopic re-operations and compare it to laparotomy.

METHODS

From January 2012 to December 2016, patients undergoing a re-operation within one month after lower gastrointestinal tract surgery were included and divided into laparoscopy and laparotomy groups. The primary endpoint was successful re-operation, defined as recovery without any of the following: conversion to laparotomy, need of further invasive treatments or death. Secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay and 30-day morbidity and mortality. Demographic, clinical and surgical characteristics were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Out of 114 patients who underwent a re-operation, 71 met the inclusion criteria. Thirty (42%) patients underwent laparoscopy and 41 (58%) laparotomy. Thirty (42%) patients were male and median age was 72.0 years-old. The initial operation was elective in 24 (34%) patients, and 50% of the initial operations were colorectal resections in both groups. Multivariate analyses showed that type of approach did not affect the re-operation success rate. Laparotomy was an independent predictor of prolonged hospital stay (OR 3.582, 95%CI 1.191-10.776, p = 0.023) and mortality (OR 13.123, 95%CI 1.301-131.579, p = 0.029).

CONCLUSIONS

Re-operations within 30 days after lower gastrointestinal tract surgery may be safe in selected patients, as effective as laparotomy, and associated with shorter hospital stay and lower mortality rates.

Eligibility criteria for ambulatory colectomy

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To determine the statistical indicators aimed at identifying patients for whom ambulatory colectomy could be proposed without additional risk.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The medical charts of patients who benefited from scheduled colonic or rectal resection during conventional hospitalization stays between 2018 and 2019 were reviewed. Eligibility for ambulatory colectomy was defined by hospital stay≤4 days and absence of any postoperative complication. Patient characteristics were compared, and the results were modeled in the form of a decision-making tree. The effect of an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocol for each sub-group was calculated.

RESULTS

One hundred and ten (110) patients were selected (41 "eligible" and 69 "non-eligible"). Median age was 73 years (27-95). Nearly 80% of the patients were operated for cancer. In multivariate analysis, age (≥65 years, OR=3.15, CI95%=1.22-8.12), diabetes (OR=3.91, CI95%=1.03-14.8) and indication (sigmoidectomy for diverticulosis, OR=0.21, CI=95%=0.05-0.9) were the only identified independent variables. Likelihood for ambulatory eligibility was 83.3% (<65 years, sigmoidectomy pour diverticulosis, +ERAS=92%-96.9%), 58.3% (<65 years, other indication, +ERAS=63.4%-89.9%), 35.7% (≥65 years without diabetes, +ERAS=40.0%-55.9%) and 8.3% (≥65 years with diabetes, +ERAS=10.0%-20.1%).

CONCLUSION

Sigmoidectomy for diverticulosis in a patient under 65 years age represents the best indication for ambulatory colectomy, a procedure that must not be proposed to diabetic patients over 65 years of age. In the other cases (<65 years operated in another indication and non-diabetic≥65 years), ambulatory surgery is possible, pending satisfactory application of the ERAS protocol.

A Review of Normal Intestinal Healing, Intestinal Anastomosis, and the Pathophysiology and Treatment of Intestinal Dehiscence in Foreign Body Obstructions in Dogs

Small intestinal anastomoses are commonly performed in veterinary medicine following resection of diseased or devitalized intestinal tissue. Traditionally, suture has been employed to anastomose intestinal ends. However, use of intestinal staplers has become increasingly popular due to the ability to produce a rapid anastomosis with purported superior healing properties. Under normal conditions, intestinal healing occurs in three phases: inflammatory, proliferative, and maturation. Dehiscence, a devastating consequence of intestinal anastomosis surgery, most often occurs during the inflammatory phase of healing where the biomechanical strength of the anastomosis is almost entirely dependent on the anastomotic technique (suture or staple line). The resulting septic peritonitis is associated with a staggering morbidity rate upwards of 85% secondary to the severe systemic aberrations and financial burden induced by septic peritonitis and requirement of a second surgery, respectively. Intraoperative and postoperative consideration of the multifactorial nature of dehiscence is required for successful patient management to mitigate recurrence. Moreover, intensive postoperative critical care management is necessitated and includes antibiotic and fluid therapy, vasopressor or colloidal support, and monitoring of the patient's fluid balance and cardiovascular status. An understanding of anastomotic techniques and their relation to intestinal healing will facilitate intraoperative decision-making and may minimize the occurrence of postoperative dehiscence.

Unplanned surgical reoperations as a quality indicator in pediatric tertiary general surgical specialties: Associated risk factors and hospitalization, a retrospective case-control analysis

Unplanned reoperations have not been studied extensively in pediatric patients, especially concerning risk factors. We aim to estimate the rate of unplanned reoperations and to determine the associated factors in pediatric general surgical specialties.This analysis included a retrospective case-control study of unplanned reoperations from July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2017 in the general surgical specialties. For each case, we identified approximately 2 randomly selected controls who underwent the same type of operation. The factors involved in the unplanned reoperations were investigated using univariate and multivariate analysis.Of the 3263 patients who underwent surgery, unplanned reoperations were performed in 139 patients (4.3%). The main indications for unplanned reoperations were wound complications (n = 52, 42.6%), followed by postoperative ileus (n = 12, 9.8%), postoperative bleeding (n = 8, 6.6%), and intraabdominal infection (n = 13, 10.7%). Following multivariate analysis, 2 factors remained significantly associated with unplanned reoperation: higher initial surgery-related risk level (P = .007, risk ratio (RR) = 0.48; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.27-0.82) and operation performed outside working hours (P = .031, RR = 0.52; 95% CI = 0.30-0.89).Various patient- and procedure-related factors were associated with unplanned reoperations. This information might be helpful for the optimization of treatment planning and resource allocation.

Analysis of trauma patients with unplanned returns to the operating room

Objectives

Trauma patients undergoing damage-control surgery may have a planned return to the operating room. In contrast, little is known about unplanned returns to the operating room (uROR) in trauma. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for uROR in trauma patients. It is hypothesized that blunt trauma patients with uROR have higher mortality when compared to penetrating trauma patients with uROR. Additionally, it is hypothesized that trauma patients with uROR after thoracotomy have higher mortality than patients with uROR after laparotomy.

Material and Methods

A retrospective analysis of the National Trauma Data Bank from 2011-2015 including any adult patient with an uROR was performed.

Results

From 3.447.320 patients, 9.269 (0.2%) were identified to have uROR. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, 27 independent predictors were identified for risk of uROR with the strongest independent risk factor being compartment syndrome (OR= 10.50, CI= 9.35-11.78, p <0.001). Blunt (compared to penetrating) mechanism was associated with higher risk for mortality in patents with uROR (OR= 1.69, CI= 1.14-2.51, p <0.001) as was re-incision thoracotomy (RT) compared to re-incision laparotomy (RL) (OR= 2.22, CI= 1.29-3.84, p <0.001).

Conclusion

The strongest risk factor for uROR in trauma is compartment syndrome. Both a blunt (compared to penetrating) mechanism and RT (compared to RL) are independent risk factors for mortality in patients undergoing an uROR.

A Novel Closure Technique for Complex Abdominal Wounds

INTRODUCTION

Abdominal wound closure is a challenge in patients undergoing colorectal surgery with a complex history of multiple abdominopelvic operations. Loss of domain of the abdominal fascia because of prior laparotomies precludes the use of simple, everyday abdominal wound closure techniques. Furthermore, ongoing intra-abdominal sepsis, with or without a concurrent entero- or colocutaneous fistula, increases the risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality in this patient population. We propose an abdominal wound closure technique for patients with multiple previous complex operations and subsequent ongoing abdominopelvic sepsis.

TECHNIQUE

Following completion of the intra-abdominal component of the operation, the abdominal wall fascial edges are identified and mobilized to allow for a smooth skin closure. The skin is brought together with a small amount of subcutaneous tissue in the abdominal wound line and sutured with a 1.0 Prolene stitch by using the vertical mattress technique. For both wound edges, a dental roll is inserted between the entry and exit points of the suture, with the suture material placed above and over the dental roll, and thus the dental roll is incorporated within the stitch when it is tied down. These stitches and dental rolls are placed along the length of the wound. No mesh is utilized, and the technique achieves skin closure with development of a subsequent ventral hernia.

RESULTS

Good postoperative short-term and long-term overall outcomes were achieved in 14 patients who underwent complex abdominal wound closure. Two patients required further late operative intervention because of the incarceration of the known ventral hernia (at 34 and 120 months postoperatively).

CONCLUSIONS

Complex abdominal wound closure in this setting is safe and feasible to achieve a healthy abdominal wall closure and enable healing by primary intention after colorectal surgery.

Unplanned Reoperation Following Colorectal Surgery: Indications and Operations

AIM

Prior studies have demonstrated a reoperation rate ranging from 5.8 to 7.6% following colorectal surgery. However, the indications for reoperation have not been extensively evaluated. We aimed to describe the indications for reoperation and associated procedures following colorectal resection.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study of all patients undergoing colorectal resection at a single institution from 2003 to 2013. For patients who returned to the operating room, the primary indication was categorized into mutually exclusive categories and all procedures performed within 30 days of the initial operation were indexed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed.

RESULTS

We identified 2793 patients who underwent colorectal operations, of which 407 (14.6%) were emergent. A total of 178 (6.7%) patients returned to the operating room. On multivariate analysis, emergent operation, malnutrition, corticosteroid use, and operative duration were independently associated with reoperation; independent functional status was protective. The most common indications for reoperation were anastomotic leak and bowel obstruction. The most common procedures performed were ostomy creation, bowel resection, and adhesiolysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Reoperation after colorectal surgery is a relatively common occurrence for which we have identified the risk factors, most common indications, and specific procedures performed. This knowledge will help identify areas for improvement.

Returns to Operating Room After Colon and Rectal Surgery in a Tertiary Care Academic Medical Center: a Valid Measure of Surgical Quality?

INTRODUCTION

Returns to the operating room (ROR) have been suggested as a marker of surgical quality. Increasingly, quality and value metrics are utilized for reimbursement as well as public reporting to inform health care consumers. We sought to understand the etiology of ROR and assess the validity of simple ROR as a quality metric.

METHODS

This was a single referral center retrospective review of all colon and rectal operations between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014. Surgical Systems Nurse + was constructed and validated at our institution for classifying ROR as either an unplanned return to the OR, planned return due to complications, planned staged return, or an unrelated return. The primary outcome was the classification of ROR and total number of ROR within 30 days.

RESULTS

Of the 2389 colorectal patients who underwent surgery between January 1, 2014 and December 31, 2014; 214 returned to the operating room within 30 days (9.0%). Among the 214 patients, there were a total of 232 ROR with an average of 1.1 ROR per patient (range 1-4); 90 (38.8%) were unplanned ROR, 49 (21.1%) were planned returns due to complications, 92 (39.7%) were planned staged returns, and 1 (0.4%) were unrelated ROR. The most common reason for an unplanned ROR was an anastomotic leak (n = 21; 9.1%). Overall, unplanned reoperations were rare events (n = 90/2389; 3.8%), largely comprised of patients experiencing an anastomotic abscess or leak (n=21/2389; 0.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a high volume and complexity academic colon and rectal surgery practice, RORs within 30 days occurred after 10.4% of cases. Unplanned ROR were relatively rare and most commonly associated with an anastomotic leak. Since the majority of ROR were planned-staged returns, overall rate of ROR should be questioned as a metric of surgical quality. Perhaps, the anastomotic leak rate may be a better metric to monitor for quality improvement efforts.

Systematic review of the feasibility of laparoscopic reoperation for early postoperative complications following colorectal surgery

Background

Returning to the operating theatre for management of early postoperative complications after colorectal surgery is an important key performance indicator. Laparoscopic surgery has benefits that may be useful in surgical emergencies. This study explored the evidence for the advantages of laparoscopic reoperation.

Methods

A systematic review was performed to identify publications reporting the outcomes of laparoscopy as a mode of reoperation for the management of early postoperative complications of colorectal surgery. The main outcomes examined were 30-day mortality, 30-day morbidity, length of hospital stay, second reoperation rate, ICU admission and stoma formation at reoperation.

Results

After screening 3657 citations, ten non-randomized cohort studies were identified (1137 reoperations). Laparoscopic reoperation was equivalent to or better than open reoperation, with lower rates of 30-day mortality (0–4·4 versus 0–13·6 per cent), 30-day morbidity (6–40 versus 30–80 per cent), length of stay (mean(s.d.) 15·8(2·8) versus 29·1(14·5) days), ICU admission and duration of stay in the ICU. Anastomotic leak was the most common indication, after which more patients received a defunctioning loop stoma instead of an end stoma at laparoscopic than open reoperation.

Conclusion

Laparoscopic reoperation is feasible in selected patients, with the advantages of improved short-term outcomes.

Using Merged Clinical and Claims Registry Data to Identify High Utilizers of Surgical Inpatient Care 1 Year after Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Under bundled payment initiatives, providers will be held financially responsible for patients' acute and post-acute care costs. Certain patients, termed high utilizers, use disproportionate shares of resources during 1 year. The aim of this study was to identify high utilizers, describe their costs, and determine whether preoperative characteristics predict high utilizer status.

STUDY DESIGN

Colectomy patients with 1-year follow-up were identified in a linked clinical (American College of Surgeons NSQIP) and administrative (Medicare inpatient claims) dataset (2005 to 2008). Cost of inpatient care was calculated by multiplying patient Medicare charges in each cost center by cost-to-charge ratios from the Medicare cost reports. A mixed-effects logistic model quantified the association between preoperative characteristics and being a high utilizer after elective and emergent colectomies.

RESULTS

One thousand and fifty-five of 10,561 colectomy patients accounted for >50% of the inpatient care cost of the entire cohort during 1 year postoperatively. This top decile of patients were labeled high utilizers and had substantially greater costs in the following cost centers: intensive care ($36,322 vs $0), respiratory ($2,875 vs $22), radiology ($649 vs $29), and cardiology ($5,057 vs $166) (all p < 0.001). High utilizers more frequently had emergent index colectomies (43% vs 17%; p < 0.001). Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV and V had 2-fold increased odds of being high utilizers after both elective (odds ratio = 2.72; 95% CI, 1.89-3.90) and emergent colectomies (odds ratio = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.23-3.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the top cost decile account for the majority of costs in the year after colectomy, disproportionately accumulate those costs in particular cost centers, and can be identified preoperatively.

Intraoperative assessment of colorectal anastomotic integrity: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Surgeons have attempted to minimize postoperative anastomotic complications by employing intraoperative tests and manoeuvres to assess colorectal anastomotic integrity. These have evolved over time with improvement in operative technology and techniques. This systematic review aims to examine the impact of such intraoperative assessments.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies assessing intraoperative anastomotic assessments and their impact on postoperative anastomotic complications was performed. Intraoperative measures undertaken as a result of intraoperative assessments and postoperative anastomotic complications were analysed.

RESULTS

37 Studies were identified. 13 studies evaluated basic mechanical patency tests, ten studies evaluated endoscopic visualisation techniques and 14 studies evaluated microperfusion techniques. Postoperative anastomotic complications were significantly lower in patients tested with basic mechanical patency tests compared to those untested (non-RCT: 4.1 vs. 8.1 %, p = 0.03, RCTs: 5.8 vs. 16.0 %, p = 0.024). There were no differences in postoperative anastomotic complications between tested and non-tested cohorts in non-randomised cohort studies evaluating endoscopic visualisation techniques. However, intraoperative measures taken after abnormal intraoperative tests may have reduced the number of postoperative complications. Perfusion analysis techniques are not in routine widespread clinical practice as yet, but newer techniques such as fluorescent dyes and imaging under near infrared light show technical feasibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative colorectal anastomotic assessment has evolved together with advancement of technology in the surgical setting. Moderate benefit in terms of lower postoperative anastomotic complications has been shown with basic mechanical patency testing and more recently with intraoperative endoscopic visualisation of colorectal anastomoses. The next advance and possible introduction into routine practice may include the use of microperfusion techniques. The latest in this group of techniques, which utilise autofluorescent dyes such as Indocyanine green, hold great potential. Well-planned controlled studies or ideally, randomised controlled trials need to be conducted to further assess the benefit of these latest techniques.