Search

Background: Surgical resection is a mainstay of colorectal cancer treatment, and prior studies have shown improved outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer by colorectal surgical specialists compared with nonspecialized surgeons. Here, we examine the geographic distribution of colorectal surgeons in the United States and its relationship with sociodemographic characteristics of the served population., Methods: The Area Health Resource File from 2017 to 2018 was used to identify the number and location of colorectal surgeons practicing throughout the United States and sociodemographic characteristics at the county and hospital referral region (HRR) level. The main outcomes of interest were the density of colorectal surgeons per 100,000 population and associations with sociodemographic characteristics at the county and HRR level based on multivariable linear regression., Results: In multivariable analysis, regions with higher proportion of nonwhite individuals and college-educated individuals had significantly more colorectal surgeons per 100,000 population, whereas regions with higher proportions of uninsured individuals had significantly fewer colorectal surgeons per 100,000 population at both the county and HRR levels., Conclusions: Geographic and sociodemographic variability exists in the distribution of colorectal surgeons in the United States. Such variability may be contributing to disparities in access to specialized colorectal care., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Most hospitals in the United States are reimbursed for colectomy via a bundled payment based on the diagnosis-related group assigned. Enhanced recovery after surgery programs have been shown to improve the value of colorectal surgery, but little is known about the granular financial tradeoffs required at individual hospitals., Objective: The purpose of this study is to analyze the index-hospitalization impact on specific cost centers associated with enhanced recovery after surgery implementation for diagnosis-related groups commonly assigned to patients undergoing colon resections., Design: We performed a single-institution retrospective, nonrandomized, preintervention (2013-2014) and postintervention (2015-2017) analysis of hospital costs., Setting: This study was conducted at an academic medical center., Patients: A total of 1297 patients with diagnosis-related group 330 (colectomy with complications/comorbidities) and 331 (colectomy without complications/comorbidities) were selected., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was total index-hospitalization cost. Secondary outcomes included specific cost center expenses., Results: Total median cost for diagnosis-related group 330 in the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery group was $24,111 ($19,285-$28,658) compared to $21,896 ($17,477-$29,179) in the enhanced recovery after surgery group, p = 0.01. Total median cost for diagnosis-related group 331 in the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery group was $19,268 ($17,286-$21,858) compared to $18,444 ($15,506-$22,847) in the enhanced recovery after surgery group, p = 0.22. When assessing cost changes after enhanced recovery after surgery implementation for diagnosis-related group 330, operating room costs increased (p = 0.90), nursing costs decreased (p = 0.02), anesthesia costs increased (p = 0.20), and pharmacy costs increased (p = 0.08). For diagnosis-related group 331, operating room costs increased (p = 0.001), nursing costs decreased (p < 0.001), anesthesia costs increased (p = 0.03), and pharmacy costs increased (p = 0.001)., Limitations: This is a single-center study with a pre- and postintervention design., Conclusions: The returns on investment at the hospital level for enhanced recovery after surgery implementations in colorectal surgery result largely from cost savings associated with decreased nursing expenses. These savings likely offset increased spending on operating room supplies, anesthesia, and medications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B204. IMPACTO DE LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DEL PROTOCOLO DE RECUPERACIÓN MEJORADA DESPUÉS DE CIRUGÍA EN EL COSTO DE LA HOSPITALIZACIÓN ÍNDICE EN CENTROS ESPECÍFICOS: La mayoría de los hospitales en los Estados Unidos son reembolsados por la colectomía a través de un paquete de pago basado en el grupo de diagnóstico asignado. Se ha demostrado que los programas de recuperación después de la cirugía mejoran el valor de la cirugía colorrectal, pero se sabe poco sobre las compensaciones financieras granulares que se requieren en los hospitales individuales.El objetivo de este estudio es analizar el impacto del índice de hospitalización en centros de costos específicos asociados con la implementación de RMDC para grupos relacionados con el diagnóstico comúnmente asignados a pacientes que se someten a resecciones de colon.Realizamos un análisis retrospectivo, no aleatorio, previo (2013-2014) y posterior a la intervención (2015-2017) de los costos hospitalarios de una sola institución.Centro médico académico.Un total de 1. 297 pacientes con diagnóstico relacionado con el grupo 330 (colectomía con complicaciones/comorbilidades) y 331 (colectomía sin complicaciones/comorbilidades).El resultado primario fue el índice total de costos de hospitalización. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron gastos específicos del centro de costos.El costo medio total para el grupo relacionado con el diagnóstico de 330 en el grupo de recuperación pre-mejorada después de la cirugía fue de $24,111 ($19,285- $28,658) en comparación con $21,896 ($17,477- $29,179) en el grupo de recuperación mejorada después de la cirugía, p = 0.01. El costo medio total para DRG 331 en el grupo de recuperación pre-mejorada después de la cirugía fue de $19,268 ($17,286- $21,858) en comparación con $18,444 ($15,506-$22,847) en el grupo de recuperación mejorada después de la cirugía, p = 0.22. Al evaluar los cambios en los costos después de una recuperación mejorada después de la implementación de la cirugía para el grupo 330 relacionado con el diagnóstico, los costos de la sala de operaciones aumentaron (p = 0.90), los costos de enfermería disminuyeron (p = 0.02) los costos de anestesia aumentaron (p = 0.20) y los costos de farmacia aumentaron (p = 0.08). Para el grupo 331 relacionado con el diagnóstico, los costos de la sala de operaciones aumentaron (p = 0.001), los costos de enfermería disminuyeron (p < 0.001) los costos de anestesia aumentaron (p = 0.03) y los costos de farmacia aumentaron (p = 0.001).Este es un estudio de un solo centro con un diseño previo y posterior a la intervención.El retorno de la inversión a nivel hospitalario para una recuperación mejorada después de la implementación de la cirugía en la cirugía colorrectal se debe en gran parte al ahorro de costos asociado con la disminución de los gastos de enfermería. Es probable que estos ahorros compensen el aumento de los gastos en suministros de quirófano, anestesia y medicamentos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B204. (Traducción-Dr. Gonzalo Hagerman).

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal perioperative care pathway designed to achieve early recovery by preserving preoperative organ function and minimizing the stress response following surgery. Few studies have assessed the association between ERAS and postoperative cardiac complications. The goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of ERAS on postoperative cardiac complications., Materials and Methods: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database of colorectal patients who underwent surgery at a tertiary colorectal cancer referral center was carried out. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors including demographics, comorbidities, medications, and fluid administration were recorded. The primary outcome was postoperative cardiac arrhythmia, and secondary outcomes included other postoperative complications., Results: A total of 800 patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery were identified. Four hundred seventeen patients (52%) were in the control group and 383 patients (48%) were in the ERAS group. Patients in both groups were similar with regard to demographics and clinical characteristics. There were significantly higher rates of cardiac arrhythmia in the control group (5.3%) compared with the ERAS group (1.8%), p = 0.009. Multivariable analysis revealed that ERAS was an independent predictor of decreased postoperative cardiac arrhythmia (OR 0.30, 95%CI 0.17-0.55, p < 0.001) while older age was an independent predictor of increased postoperative cardiac arrhythmia (OR 1.08, 95%CI 1.02-1.13, p = 0.008). Patients receiving lower amounts of intravenous fluids had significantly decreased postoperative cardiac arrhythmia (OR = 0.25, 95%CI 0.09-0.67, p = 0.006)., Conclusions: ERAS and goal-directed fluid therapy are associated with significant reductions in postoperative cardiac arrhythmias.

Background: Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs are now standard of care for colorectal surgery. Efforts have been aimed at decreasing postoperative opioid consumption. The goal of this study is to evaluate the effect of liposomal bupivacaine transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks on opioid use and its downstream effect on rates of ileus and hospital length of stay (LOS)., Methods: We performed a retrospective pre- and postintervention time-trend analysis (2016-2018) of ERAS patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery at two academic medical centers within the same hospital system. The intervention was liposomal bupivacaine TAP blocks versus standard local infiltration with bupivacaine with a primary outcome of total morphine milligram equivalents (MME) administered within 72 h of surgery. Secondary outcomes included hospital LOS and rate of postoperative ileus., Results: There were 556 patients included at the control hospital, and 384 patients were included at the treatment hospital. Patients at both hospitals were similar with regard to age, body mass index, comorbidities, and surgical indication. In an adjusted time-trend analysis, the treatment hospital was associated with a significant decrease in MME administered (- 15.9 mg, p = 0.04) and hospital LOS (- 0.8 days, p < 0.001). There was no significant decrease in the rate of ileus at the treatment hospital (- 6.9%, p = 0.08)., Conclusions: In a time-trend analysis, the addition of liposomal bupivacaine TAP blocks into the ERAS protocol resulted in significantly reduced opioid use and shorter hospital LOS for patients undergoing surgery at the treatment hospital. Liposomal bupivacaine TAP blocks should be considered for inclusion in the standard ERAS protocol.

Background: Colorectal neuroendocrine tumors are a rare malignancy, yet their incidence appears to be increasing. The optimal treatment for the high-grade subset of these tumors remains unclear. We aimed to examine the relationship between different treatment modalities and outcomes for patients with high-grade neuroendocrine carcinomas (HGNECs) of the colon and rectum., Methods: The National Cancer Database (2004-2015) was used to identify patients diagnosed with colorectal HGNECs. The primary outcome was overall survival. A Cox Proportional hazard model was used to identify risk factors for survival., Results: Overall, 1208 patients had HGNECs; 452 (37.4%) patients had primary tumors of the rectum, and 756 (62.5%) patients had primary tumors of the colon. A total of 564 (46.7%) patients presented with stage IV disease. The median survival was 9.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.2-9.8]. In multivariable analysis, surgical resection [hazard ratio (HR) 0.54, 95% CI 0.44-0.66; p < 0.001], chemotherapy (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.79; p < 0.001), and rectum as the primary site of tumor (HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.51-0.76; p < 0.001) were associated with better overall survival, while older age (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.01; p = 0.02) and the presence of metastatic disease (HR 3.34, 95% CI 2.69-4.15; p < 0.001) were associated with worse survival., Conclusions: Patients with colorectal HGNECs selected for chemotherapy and surgical resection of the primary tumor demonstrated better overall survival than those managed without resection. Patients who were able to undergo systemic chemotherapy may benefit from potentially curative resection of the primary tumor.

Introduction: In the modern era of minimally invasive colorectal surgery and enhanced recovery pathways, the value of preoperative bowel preparation remains debated. In this review, we evaluate evidence regarding the use of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP) and oral antibiotic bowel preparation to make recommendations for their application in contemporary practice.Methods: We searched the PubMed database through December 2017 for relevant randomized controlled trials, Cochrane Reviews, American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database studies, and other reviews pertaining to MBP and oral antibiotic bowel preparation in elective colorectal surgery and conducted a narrative review.Results: The combination of MBP and oral antibiotics reduces the incidence of surgical site infection, anastomotic leak, and postoperative sepsis. MBP improves laparoscopic surgical viewing and facilitates intraoperative manipulation of the bowel in minimally invasive surgery.Conclusion: Based on existing data, we recommend that preoperative care includes MBP and oral antibiotics in elective minimally invasive colorectal surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]