Search

Background: In patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo IPAA, a diverting ileostomy is used to diminish the severity of anastomotic complications. Typically, the ileostomy is closed after an interval of 2 to 4 months. The safety of earlier closure of the ileostomy after pouch surgery is unknown., Objective: This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes in patients randomly assigned to early (7-12 days) or late (≥8 weeks) ileostomy closure after ileal pouch construction., Design: This was a multicenter, prospective randomized trial., Setting: The study was conducted at colorectal surgical units at select United States hospitals., Patients: Adults with ulcerative colitis who underwent 2- or 3-stage proctocolectomy with IPAA were included., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcomes included Comprehensive Complication Index at 30 days after ileostomy closure. The secondary outcomes included complications, severe complications, reoperations, and readmissions within 30 days of ileostomy closure., Results: The trial was stopped after interim analysis because of a high rate of complications after early ileostomy closure. Among 36 patients analyzed, 1 patient (3%) had unplanned proctectomy with end-ileostomy. Of the remaining 35 patients, 28 patients (80%) were clinically eligible for early closure and underwent radiologic assessment. There were 3 radiologic failures. Of the 25 remaining patients, 22 patients (88%) were randomly assigned to early closure (n = 10) or late closure (n = 12), and 3 patients were excluded. Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 14.8 (0-54) and 0 (0-23) after early and late closure (p = 0.02). One or more complications occurred in 7 patients (70%) after early closure and in 2 patients (17%) after late closure (p = 0.01)' and complications were severe in 3 patients (30%) after early closure and 0 patients after late closure (p = 0.04). Reoperation was required in 1 patient (10%) and 0 patients (p = 0.26) after early closure and readmission was required in 7 patients (70%) and 1 patient (8%) after late closure (p = 0.003)., Limitations: This study was limited by early study closure and selection bias., Conclusions: Early closure of a diverting ileostomy in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent IPAA is associated with an unacceptably high rate of complications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C68., Alta Tasa De Complicaciones Despus Del Cierre Precoz De La Ileostoma Terminacin Temprana Del Ensayo Aleatorizado De Intervalo Corto Versus Largo Para La Reversin De La Ileostoma En Asa Despus De La Ciruga De Reservorio Ileal: ANTECEDENTES:En los pacientes con colitis ulcerosa que se someten a una anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal, se utiliza una ileostomía de derivación para disminuir la gravedad de las complicaciones de la anastomosis. Por lo general, la ileostomía se cierra después de un intervalo de 2 a 4 meses. Se desconoce la seguridad del cierre más temprano de la ileostomía después de la cirugía de reservorio.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados posoperatorios en pacientes asignados al azar al cierre temprano (7-12 días) o tardío (≥ 8 semanas) de la ileostomía después de la construcción de un reservorio ileal.DISEÑO:Este fue un ensayo aleatorizado prospectivo multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:El estudio se realizó en unidades quirúrgicas colorrectales en hospitales seleccionados de los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron adultos con colitis ulcerosa que se sometieron a proctocolectomía en 2 o 3 tiempos con anastomosis ileoanal con reservorio.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados primarios incluyeron el Índice Integral de Complicaciones a los 30 días después del cierre de la ileostomía. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron complicaciones, complicaciones graves, reoperaciones y readmisiones dentro de los 30 días posteriores al cierre de la ileostomía.RESULTADOS:El ensayo se detuvo después del análisis interino debido a una alta tasa de complicaciones después del cierre temprano de la ileostomía. Entre los 36 pacientes analizados, 1 (3%) tuvo una proctectomía no planificada con ileostomía terminal. De los 35 pacientes restantes, 28 (80%) fueron clínicamente elegibles para el cierre temprano y se sometieron a una evaluación radiológica. Hubo 3 fracasos radiológicos. De los 25 pacientes restantes, 22 (88 %) se asignaron al azar a cierre temprano (n = 10) o tardío (n = 12) y 3 fueron excluidos. La mediana del Índice Integral de Complicaciones fue de 14,8 (0-54) y 0 (0-23) después del cierre temprano y tardío (p = 0,02). Una o más complicaciones ocurrieron en 7 pacientes (70%) después del cierre temprano y 2 (17%) pacientes después del cierre tardío (p = 0,01) y fueron graves en 3 (30%) y 0 pacientes, respectivamente (p = 0,04). Requirieron reintervención en 1 (10%) y 0 (p = 0,26) y reingreso en 7 (70%) y 1 (8%) pacientes (p = 0,003).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por el cierre temprano del estudio; sesgo de selección.CONCLUSIONES:El cierre temprano de una ileostomía de derivación en pacientes con colitis ulcerosa con anastomosis de reservorio ileoanal se asocia con una tasa inaceptablemente alta de complicaciones. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C68. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio)., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2022.)

Background: Preoperative chemoradiation is indicated for clinical stage II and III rectal cancers; however, the accuracy of clinical staging with preoperative imaging is imperfect., Objective: The study aimed to better characterize the incidence and management of clinical and pathologic stage discordances in patients who did not receive preoperative chemoradiation., Design: This was a retrospective cohort analysis., Settings: The source of data was the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2015., Patients: We identified patients who underwent resection with curative intent for clinical stage I rectal adenocarcinoma without preoperative chemotherapy or radiation., Main Outcome Measures: We evaluated the characteristics of "upstaged" patients-those with T3/T4 tumors found on pathology (pathologic stage II) and/or with positive regional nodes in the resection specimen (pathologic stage III) compared with those patients who were not upstaged (pathologic stage I). We then used a mixed-effects multivariable survival model to compare overall survival between these groups., Results: Among 7818 clinical stage I rectal cancer patients who did not receive preoperative therapy, tumor upstaging occurred in 819 (10.6%) and nodal upstaging occurred in 1612 (20.8%). Upstaged patients were more likely than those not upstaged to have higher grade tumors and positive margins. Survival was worse in upstaged patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.4-1.9) but improved among those upstaged patients who received either chemotherapy (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9) or chemoradiation (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7)., Limitations: In addition to the inherent limitations of a retrospective cohort study, the National Cancer Database does not record functional outcomes, local recurrence, or disease-specific survival, so we are restricted to the evaluation of overall survival as an oncologic outcome., Conclusions: Inaccurate preoperative staging remains a common clinical challenge in the management of rectal cancer. Survival among upstaged patients is improved among those who receive recommended postoperative chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, yet many patients do not receive guideline-concordant care. See Video Abstract at https://links.lww.com/DCR/B999 ., Predictores Y Resultados De Sobre Estadificacin En Pacientes Con Cncer De Recto Que No Recibieron Terapia Preoperatoria: ANTECEDENTES:La quimio radiación preoperatoria está indicada para los estadios clínicos II y III del cáncer rectal; sin embargo, la precisión de la estadificación clínica con imágenes preoperatorias es imperfecta.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue mejorar la caracterización de la incidencia y el manejo de la discordancia del estadio clínico y patológico en pacientes que no recibieron quimio radiación preoperatoria.DISEÑO:Este fue un análisis de cohorte retrospectivo.CONFIGURACIÓN:La fuente de datos fue de la Base de datos Nacional del Cáncer entre los años 2006-2015.PACIENTES:Identificamos pacientes que fueron sometidos a resección con intención curativa por adenocarcinoma rectal en estadio clínico I, sin quimioterapia o radiación preoperatoria.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Evaluamos las características de los pacientes "sobre estadificados": aquellos con tumores T3/T4 encontrados en patología (estadio patológico II) y/o con ganglios regionales positivos en la muestra de resección (estadio patológico III), en comparación con aquellos pacientes que no fueron sobre estadificados (estadio patológico I). Luego usamos un modelo de supervivencia multivariable de efectos mixtos para comparar la supervivencia general entre estos grupos.RESULTADOS:De entre 7818 pacientes con cáncer de recto, en estadio clínico I, y que no recibieron tratamiento preoperatorio, se produjo una sobre estadificación tumoral en 819 (10,6%) y una sobre estadificación ganglionar en 1612 (20,8%). Los pacientes sobre estadificados tenían más probabilidades que los no sobre estadificados de tener tumores de mayor grado y márgenes positivos. La supervivencia fue peor en los pacientes sobre estadificados (HR 1,64, IC del 95% [1,4, 1,9]), pero mejoró entre los pacientes sobre estadificados que recibieron quimioterapia (HR 0,71, IC del 95% [0,6, 0,9]) o quimio radiación (HR 0,62, 95% IC [0,5, 0,7]).LIMITACIONES:Además de las limitaciones inherente a un estudio de cohorte de tipo retrospectivo, la Base de datos Nacional del Cáncer no registra resultados funcionales, la recurrencia local o la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad, por lo que estamos restringidos a la evaluación de la supervivencia general como un resultado oncológico.CONCLUSIONES:La estadificación preoperatoria inexacta sigue siendo un desafío clínico común en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. La supervivencia entre los pacientes con sobre estadificación mejora en aquellos que reciben la quimioterapia y/o quimio radioterapia postoperatoria recomendada, aunque muchos pacientes no reciben atención acorde con las guías. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B999 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto )., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2022.)

Objective: This study employs qualitative methodology to assess surgeons' perspective on decision making in management of recurrent diverticulitis to improve patient-centered decision making., Summary Background Data: The decision to pursue colectomy for patients with recurrent diverticulitis is nuanced. Strategies to enact broad acceptance of guidelines for surgery are hindered because of a knowledge gap in understanding surgeons' current attitudes and opinions., Methods: We performed semi-structured interviews with board-certified North American general and colorectal surgeons who manage recurrent diverticulitis. We purposely sampled specialists by both surgeon and practice factors. An iterative inductive/deductive strategy was used to code and analyze the interviews and create a conceptual framework., Results: 25 surgeons were enrolled over a nine-month period. There was diversity in surgeons' gender, age, experience, training, specialty (colorectal vs general surgery) and geography. Surgeons described the difficult process to determine who receives an operation. We identified seven major themes as well as twenty subthemes of the decision-making process. These were organized into a conceptual model. Across the spectrum of interviews, it was notable that there was a move over time from decisions based on counting episodes of diverticulitis to a focus on improving quality of life. Surgeons also felt that quality of life was more dependent on psychosocial factors than the degree of physiological dysfunction. [What about what surprised you/]., Conclusions: Surgeons mostly have discarded older dogma in recommending colectomy for recurrent diverticulitis based on number and severity of episodes. Instead, decision making in recurrent diverticulitis is complex, involving multiple surgeon and patient factors and evolving over time. Surgeons struggle with this decision and education- or communication-based interventions that focus on shared decision making warrant development., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None

Background: National guidelines, including the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer, recommend initiation of rectal cancer treatment within 60 days of diagnosis; however, the effect of timely treatment initiation on oncologic outcomes is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact on oncologic outcomes of initiation of rectal cancer treatment within 60 days of diagnosis., Methods: This was a retrospective review of stage II/III rectal cancer patients performed using the United States Rectal Cancer Consortium, a collaboration of 6 academic medical centers. Patients with clinical stage II/III rectal cancer who underwent radical resection between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2018 were included. The primary exposure was treatment initiation, defined as either resection or initiation of chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, within 60 days of diagnosis. The primary outcome was disease recurrence, and the secondary outcome was all-cause mortality., Results: A total of 1,031 patients meeting inclusion criteria were included in the analysis. Treatment was initiated within 60 days of diagnosis in 830 patients (80.5%) and after 60 days in 201 patients (20.3%). In multivariable logistic regression, older age, non-White race, and residence greater than 100 miles from the treatment center were significantly associated with delay in treatment beyond 60 days. In survival analysis, 167 patients (16.2%) experienced recurrent disease, and 127 patients (12.3%) died of any cause. In an adjusted model accounting for pathologic staging, treatment sequence, distance to care, age, comorbidities, treatment center, and receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, neither progression-free survival nor all-cause mortality was significantly associated with timely initiation of therapy with hazard ratios of 1.09 (0.70, 1.69) and 1.03 (0.63, 1.66), respectively., Conclusion: This study found no difference in oncologic outcomes with initiation of treatment beyond 60 days., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prospective payment models have incentivized reductions in length of stay after surgery. The benefits of abbreviated postoperative hospitalization could be undermined by increased readmissions or postacute care use, particularly for older adults or those with comorbid conditions., Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine whether hospitals with accelerated postsurgical discharge accrue total episode savings or incur greater postdischarge payments among patients stratified by age and comorbidity., Design: This was a retrospective cross-sectional study., Setting: National data from the 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files for July 2012 to June 2015 were used., Patients: We included Medicare beneficiaries undergoing elective colectomy and stratified the cohort by age (65-69, 70-79, ≥80 y) and Elixhauser comorbidity score (low: ≤0; medium: 1-5; and high: >5). Patients were categorized by the hospital's mode length of stay, reflecting "usual" care., Main Outcomes Measures: In a multilevel model, we compared mean total episode payments and components thereof among age and comorbidity categories, stratified by hospital mode length of stay., Results: Among 88,860 patients, mean total episode payments were lower in shortest versus longest length of stay hospitals across all age and comorbidity strata and were similar between age groups (65-69 y: $28,951 vs $30,566, p = 0.014; 70-79 y: $31,157 vs $32,044, p = 0.073; ≥80 y: $33,779 vs $35,771, p = 0.005) but greater among higher comorbidity (low: $23,107 vs $24,894, p = 0.001; medium: $30,809 vs $32,282, p = 0.038; high: $44,097 vs $46641, p < 0.001). Postdischarge payments were similar among length-of-stay hospitals by age (65-69 y: ∆$529; 70-79 y: ∆$291; ≥80 y: ∆$872, p = 0.25) but greater among high comorbidity (low: ∆$477; medium: ∆$480; high: ∆$1059; p = 0.02)., Limitations: Administrative data do not capture patient-level factors that influence postacute care use (preference, caregiver availability)., Conclusions: Hospitals achieving shortest length of stay after surgery accrue lower total episode payments without a compensatory increase in postacute care spending, even among patients at oldest age and with greatest comorbidity. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B624., Consecuencias De La Edad Y Las Comorbilidades Asociadas, En El Costo De La Atencin En Pacientes Sometidos a Colectoma En Programas De Alta Posoperatoria Acelerada: ANTECEDENTES:Los modelos de pago prospectivo, han sido un incentivo para reducir la estancia hospitalaria después de la cirugía. Los beneficios de una hospitalización posoperatoria "abreviada" podrían verse afectados por un aumento en los reingresos o en la necesidad de cuidados postoperatorios tempranos luego del periodo agudo, particularmente en los adultos mayores o en aquellos con comorbilidades.OBJETIVO:Determinar si los hospitales que han establecido protocolos de alta posoperatoria "acelerada" generan un ahorro en cada episodio de atención o incurren en mayores gastos después del alta, entre los pacientes estratificados por edad y por comorbilidades.DISEÑO:Estudio transversal retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Revisión a partir de la base de datos nacional del 100% de los archivos del Medicare Provider Analysis and Review desde julio de 2012 hasta junio de 2015.PACIENTES:Se incluye a los beneficiarios de Medicare a quienes se les practicó una colectomía electiva. La cohorte se estratificó por edad (65-69 años, 70-79, ≥80) y por la puntuación de comorbilidad de Elixhauser (baja: ≤0; media: 1-5; y alta: > 5). Los pacientes se categorizaron de acuerdo con la modalidad de la duración de la estancia hospitalaria del hospital, lo que representa lo que se considera es una atención usual para dicho centro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:En un modelo multinivel, comparamos la media de los pagos por episodio y los componentes de los mismos, entre las categorías de edad y comorbilidad, estratificados por la modalidad de la duración de la estancia hospitalaria.RESULTADOS:En los 88,860 pacientes, los pagos promedio por episodio fueron menores en los hospitales con una modalidad de estancia más corta frente a los de mayor duración, en todos los estratos de edad y comorbilidad, y fueron similares entre los grupos de edad (65-69: $28,951 vs $30,566, p = 0,014; 70-79: $31,157 vs $32,044, p = 0,073; ≥ 80 $33,779 vs $35,771, p = 0,005), pero mayor entre los pacientes con comorbilidades más altas (baja: $23,107 vs $24,894, p = 0,001; media $30,809 vs $32,282, p = 0,038; alta: $44,097 vs $46,641, p <0,001). Los pagos generados luego del alta hospitalaria fueron similares con relación a la estancia hospitalaria de los diferentes hospitales con respecto a la edad (65-69 años: ∆ $529; 70-79 años: ∆ $291; ≥80 años: ∆ $872, p = 0,25), pero mayores en aquellos con más alta comorbilidad (baja ∆ $477, medio ∆ $480, alto ∆ $1059, p = 0,02).LIMITACIONES:Las bases de datos administrativas no capturan los factores del paciente que influyen en el cuidado luego del estado posoperatorio agudo (preferencia, disponibilidad del proveedor del cuidado).CONCLUSIONES:Los hospitales que logran una estancia hospitalaria más corta después de la cirugía, acumulan pagos más bajos por episodio, sin un incremento compensatorio del gasto en la atención pos-aguda, incluso entre pacientes de mayor edad y con mayor comorbilidad. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B624. (Traducción-Dr Eduardo Londoño-Schimmer)., (Copyright © The ASCRS 2021.)

Objective: We sought to measure the extent of variation in episode spending around total hip replacement within and across hospital systems., Summary of Background Data: Bundled payment programs are pressuring hospitals to reduce spending on surgery. Meanwhile, many hospitals are joining larger health systems with the stated goal of improved care at lower cost., Methods: Cross-sectional study of fee-for-service Medicare patients undergoing total hip replacement in 2016 at hospital systems identified in the American Hospital Association Annual Survey. We calculated risk- and reliability-adjusted average 30-day episode payments at the hospital and system level., Results: Average episode payments varied nearly as much within hospital systems ($2515 between the lowest- and highest-cost hospitals, 95% confidence interval $2272-$2,758) as they did between the lowest- and highest-cost quintiles of systems ($2712, 95% confidence interval $2545-$2879). Variation was driven by post-acute care utilization. Many systems have concentrated hip replacement volume at relatively high-cost hospitals., Conclusions: Given the wide variation in surgical spending within health systems, we propose tailored strategies for systems to maximize savings in bundled payment programs., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: In the United States, the majority of colorectal procedures are performed primarily by nonfellowship trained general surgeons. Given that surgical technique and experience affect patient outcomes, it is important that general surgeons are well-trained to perform colorectal surgery operations. In this study, we evaluated how prepared general surgery residents were to perform colorectal procedures upon graduating residency., Design: This was a retrospective observational cohort study. Attending ratings of residents' intraoperative performance were collected with the System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning application from 9/2015 to 9/2018. Descriptive analyses and Bayesian mixed models were used to determine a resident's probability of being deemed competent upon graduating residency, controlling for core vs. advanced procedure, case complexity, and rater and resident effects., Setting: Faculty and residents within 30 teaching institutions within the Procedural Learning and Safety Collaborative (PLSC)., Patients: We sampled colorectal procedures and categorized them as core or advanced based on American Board of Surgery designations., Results: A total of 564 residents were rated after 2102 operations (82% core, 18% advanced). A resident in their fifth year of clinical training had a 93% (95% CI 85-97%) adjusted probability of competent performance after a core procedure and 75% (95% CI 55-89%) after an advanced procedure., Conclusions: General surgery residents were not universally deemed competent to perform colorectal procedures even at the end of residency. These gaps were more pronounced for advanced colorectal procedures. Current graduation requirements should be carefully reviewed to ensure residents are appropriately trained to meet the needs of their communities. Additionally, advanced training remains a critical resource for surgeons who will perform complex colorectal procedures in practice., (Copyright © 2020 Association of Program Directors in Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Postoperative complications (POCs) are associated with worse oncologic outcomes in several cancer types. The implications of complications after rectal cancer surgery are not well studied., Methods: The United States Rectal Cancer Consortium (2007-2017) was reviewed for primary rectal adenocarcinoma patients who underwent R0/R1 resection. Ninety-day POCs were categorized as major or minor and were grouped into infectious, cardiopulmonary, thromboembolic, renal, or intestinal dysmotility. Primary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS)., Results: Among 1136 patients, the POC rate was 46% (n = 527), with 63% classified as minor and 32% classified as major. Of all POCs, infectious complications comprised 20%, cardiopulmonary 3%, thromboembolic 5%, renal 9%, and intestinal dysmotility 19%. Compared with minor or no POCs, major POCs were associated with both worse RFS and worse OS (both p < 0.01). Compared with no POCs, a single POC was associated with worse RFS (p < 0.01), while multiple POCs were associated with worse OS (p = 0.02). Regardless of complication grade, infectious POCs were associated with worse RFS (p < 0.01), while cardiopulmonary and thromboembolic POCs were associated with worse OS (both p < 0.01). Renal POCs were associated with both worse RFS (p < 0.001) and worse OS (p = 0.01). After accounting for pathologic stage, neoadjuvant therapy, and final margin status, Multivariable analysis (MVA) demonstrated worse outcomes with cardiopulmonary, thromboembolic, and renal POCs for OS (cardiopulmonary: hazard ratio [HR] 3.6, p = 0.01; thromboembolic: HR 19.4, p < 0.01; renal: HR 2.4, p = 0.01), and renal and infectious POCs for RFS (infectious: HR 2.1, p < 0.01; renal: HR 3.2, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Major complications after proctectomy for cancer are associated with decreased RFS and OS. Given the association of infectious complications and postoperative renal dysfunction with earlier recurrence of disease, efforts must be directed towards defining best practices and standardizing care.

Background: Extended care facility use is a primary driver of variation in hospitalization-associated health care payments and is increasingly a focus for savings under episode-based payment. However, concerns remain that extended care facility limits could incur rising readmissions, emergency department use, or other costs. We analyzed the effects of a statewide value improvement initiative to decrease extended care facility use after lower extremity arthroplasty on extended care facility use, readmission, emergency department use, and payments., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using complete claims from the Michigan Value Collaborative for patients undergoing lower extremity joint replacement. We compared the change in extended care facility use before (2012-2013) and after (2016-2017) the aforementioned statewide initiative with 90-day postacute care, readmission, and emergency department rates and payments using t tests., Results: Of the patients included, 68,537 underwent total knee arthroplasty; 27,131 underwent total hip arthroplasty. Statewide, extended care facility use and postacute care payments decreased (extended care facility: 27.5% before vs 18.1% after, payments: $4,999 vs $3,832, P < .0001) without increased readmission rates (8.0% vs 7.6%, P = .10) or payments ($1,087 vs $1,026, P = .14). Emergency department use increased (7.8% vs 8.9%, P < .0001). Per hospital, there was no association between extended care facility use change and readmission rate change (r = 0.05). Hospital change in extended care facility use ranged from +2.3% (no extended care facility decrease group) to -16.6% (large extended care facility decrease group) and was associated with lower total episode payments without differences in change in readmission rate/payments or emergency department use., Conclusion: Despite decreased use of extended care facilities, there was no compensatory increase in readmission rate or payments. Reducing excess use of extended care facilities after joint replacement may be an important opportunity for savings in episode-based reimbursement., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prevention of venous thromboembolism after colorectal surgery remains challenging. National guidelines endorse thromboembolism prophylaxis for 4 weeks after colorectal cancer resection. Expert consensus favors extended prophylaxis after IBD surgery. The actual frequency of prescription after resection remains unknown., Objective: This study aimed to assess prescription of extended, postdischarge venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after resection in Michigan., Design: This is a retrospective review of elective colorectal resections within a statewide collaborative receiving postdischarge, extended-duration prophylaxis., Setting: This study was conducted between October 2015 and February 2018 at an academic center., Patients: A total of 5722 patients (2171 with colorectal cancer, 266 with IBD, and 3285 with other)., Main Outcome Measures: We compared the prescription of extended, postdischarge prophylaxis over time, between hospitals and by indication., Results: Of 5722 patients, 373 (6.5%) received extended-duration prophylaxis after discharge. Use was similar between patients undergoing surgery for cancer (282/2171, 13.0%) or IBD (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), but was significantly more common for both patients undergoing surgery for cancer or IBD in comparison with patients with other indications (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). Use increased significantly among patients with cancer (6.8%-16.8%, p < 0.001) and patients with IBD (0%-15.1%, p < 0.05) over the study period. For patients with other diagnoses, use was rare and did not vary significantly (1.5%-2.3%, p = 0.49). Academic centers and large hospitals (>300 beds) were significantly more likely to prescribe extended-duration prophylaxis for all conditions (both p < 0.001), with the majority of prophylaxis concentrated at only a few hospitals., Limitations: This study was limited by the lack of assessment of actual adherence, small number of observed venous thromboembolism events, small sample of patients with IBD, and restriction to the state of Michigan., Conclusions: The use of extended-duration venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after discharge is increasing, but remains uncommon in most hospitals. Efforts to improve adherence may require quality implementation initiatives or targeted payment incentives. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. ANÁLISIS POBLACIONAL DE LA ADHERENCIA A LA PROFILAXIS ANTI-TROMBÓTICA EXTENDIDA (TEV) EN PACIENTES DE ALTA LUEGO DE UNA RESECCIÓN COLORECTAL.: La prevención del tromboembolismo venoso después de cirugía colorrectal sigue siendo un desafío. Las guías nacionales han aprobado la profilaxia del tromboembolismo durante cuatro semanas luego de una resección de cáncer colorrectal. El consenso de expertos favorece la profilaxia extendida solamente después de la cirugía por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal. La frecuencia real de prescripción después de la resección colorrectal sigue siendo desconocida.Evaluar la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada de tromboembolismo venoso después del alta luego de una resección colorrectal en Michigan.Revisión retrospectiva de las resecciones colorrectales electivas seguidas de una profilaxia de larga duración con el apoyo de todo el estado (MI).Este estudio se realizó entre octubre de 2015 y febrero de 2018 en un solo centro académico.Un universo de 5722 pacientes operados (2171 por cáncer colorrectal, 266 por enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal, 3285 por otros diagnósticos).Se comparó la prescripción de profilaxia prolongada después del alta según la duración, los hospitales y la indicación.De 5722 pacientes, 373 (6.5%) recibieron profilaxia de duración prolongada después del alta. El uso fue similar entre pacientes sometidos a cirugía por cáncer (282/2171, 13.0%) o enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (31/266, 11.7%, p = 0.54), pero fue significativamente más común para ambos en comparación con pacientes con otras indicaciones (60/3285, 1.8%, p < 0.001). El uso aumentó significativamente entre pacientes con cáncer (6.8% a 16.8% (p < 0.001)) y en pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal (0% a 15.1%, p < 0.05) durante el período de estudio. Para pacientes con otros diagnósticos, su utilización fue rara y no varió significativamente (1.5% a 2.3%, p = 0.49). Los centros académicos y los grandes hospitales (>300 camas) tenían mayor probabilidad de prescribir la profilaxia de duración extendida en todas las afecciones (ambas p < 0.001), pero la mayoría de las profilaxis se concentraron el algunos pocos grandes hospitales.Este estudio estuvo limitado por la falta de evaluación de actuales adherentes, por el pequeño número de eventos tromboembólicos venosos observados, por la pequeña muestra de pacientes con enfermedad inflamatoria intestinal y debido a ciertas restricciones en el estado de Michigan.El uso de profilaxia para el tromboembolismo venoso de duración prolongada después del alta está en aumento, pero su uso sigue siendo poco frecuente en la mayoría de los hospitales. Los esfuerzos para mejorar la adherencia al tratamiento pueden requerir iniciativas de mejoría en la calidad o incentivos específicos de reembolso. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B193. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Background: There is increased focus on the value of surgical care. Postoperative complications decrease value, but it is unknown whether high-value hospitals spend less than low-value hospitals in cases without complications. Previous studies have not evaluated both expenditures and validated outcomes in the same patients, limiting the understanding of interactions between clinical performance, efficient utilization of services, and costliness of surgical episodes., Objective: This study aimed to identify payment differences between low- and high-value hospitals in colectomy cases without adverse outcomes using a linked data set of multipayer claims and validated clinical outcomes., Design: This is a retrospective observational cohort study. We assigned each hospital a value score (ratio of cases without adverse outcome to mean episode payment). We stratified hospitals into tertiles by value and used analysis of variance tests to compare payments between low- and high-value hospitals, first for all cases, and then cases without adverse outcome., Setting: January 2012 to December 2016, this investigation used clinical registry data from 56 hospitals participating in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, linked with 30-day episode payments from the Michigan Value Collaborative., Patients: A total of 2947 patients undergoing elective colectomy were selected., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome measured was risk-adjusted, price-standardized 30-day episode payments., Results: The mean adjusted complication rate was 31% (±10.7%) at low-value hospitals and 14% (±4.6%) at high-value hospitals (p < 0.001). Low-value hospitals were paid $3807 (17%) more than high-value hospitals ($22,271 vs $18,464, p < 0.001). Among cases without adverse outcome, payments were still $2257 (11%) higher in low-value hospitals ($19,424 vs $17,167, p = 0.04)., Limitations: This study focused on outcomes and did not consider processes of care as drivers of value., Conclusions: In elective colectomy, high-value hospitals achieve lower episode payments than low-value hospitals for cases without adverse outcome, indicating mechanisms for increasing value beyond reducing complications. Worthwhile targets to optimize value in elective colectomy may include enhanced recovery protocols or other interventions that increase efficiency in all phases of care. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B56. LOGRANDO LA COLECTOMÍA DE ALTO VALOR: PREVINIENDO COMPLICACIONES O MEJORANDO LA EFICIENCIA: Hay un mayor enfoque en el valor de la atención quirúrgica. Las complicaciones postoperatorias disminuyen el valor, pero se desconoce si en los casos sin complicaciones, los hospitales de alto valor gastan menos que los hospitales de bajo valor. Estudios anteriores no han evaluado ambos gastos y validado resultados en los mismos pacientes, limitando la comprensión de las interacciones entre el rendimiento clínico, utilización eficiente de los servicios y costos de los episodios quirúrgicos.Identificar las diferencias de pago entre los hospitales de alto y bajo valor, en casos de colectomía sin resultados adversos, utilizando un conjunto de datos vinculados de reclamos de pago múltiple y resultados clínicos validados.Estudio de cohorte observacional retrospectivo. Asignamos a cada hospital una puntuación de valor (proporción de casos sin resultado adverso al pago medio del episodio). Estratificamos los hospitales por valor en terciles y utilizamos el análisis de pruebas de varianza para comparar los pagos entre hospitales de bajo y alto valor, primero para todos los casos y luego casos sin resultados adversos.De enero del 2012 a diciembre del 2016, utilizando datos de registro clínico de 56 hospitales que participan en el Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, vinculado con pagos de episodios de 30 días, del Michigan Value Collaborative.Un total de 2947 pacientes con colectomía electiva.Pagos por episodio de 30 días, ajustados al riesgo y estandarizados por precio.La tasa media de complicación ajustada fue de 31% (±10.7%) en hospitales de bajo valor y 14% (±4.6%) en hospitales de alto valor (p < 0.001). A los hospitales de bajo valor se les pagó $3807 (17%) más que a los hospitales de alto valor ($22,271 frente a $18,464, p < 0.001). Entre los casos sin resultados adversos, los pagos fueron de $2257 (11%) más altos en hospitales de bajo valor ($19,424 vs $17,167, p = 0.04).Este estudio se centró en los resultados y no se consideraron a los procesos de atención, como impulsores de valor.En la colectomía electiva, los hospitales de alto valor logran pagos de episodios más bajos, que en los hospitales de bajo valor con casos sin resultados adversos, indicando mecanismos para aumentar el valor, más allá que la reducción de complicaciones. Objetivos valiosos para optimizar el valor de la colectomía electiva, pueden incluir mejoras en los protocolos de recuperación, así como otras intervenciones que aumenten la eficiencia en todas las fases de la atención. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B56.

Background: Although most surgical outcomes research focuses on clinical end points and complications, older adult patients may value functional outcomes more. However, little is known about the risk of long-term functional disability after colorectal procedures., Objective: The purpose of this research was to understand the incidence and likelihood of functional decline after high-risk (ie, ≥1% inpatient mortality) colorectal operations both without and with complications., Design: This was a retrospective matched cohort study., Settings: The Health and Retirement Study, a nationally representative, longitudinal survey of adults >50 years of age, collects data on functional status, cognition, and demographics, among other topics. The survey was linked with Medicare claims and National Death Index data from 1992 to 2012., Patients: Patients ≥65 years of age who underwent elective high-risk colorectal surgery with functional status measured before and after surgery were included. These patients were matched 1:3 to survey respondents who did not undergo major surgery, based on propensity scores., Main Outcome Measures: Functional decline, the primary outcome, was defined as an increase in the number of activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living requiring assistance before and after surgery. Using logistic regression, we examined whether surgery without or with complications was associated with functional decline., Results: We identified 289 patients who underwent high-risk colorectal surgery and 867 matched control subjects. Of the surgery patients, 90 (31%) experienced a complication. Compared with the control subjects, surgery patients experienced greater likelihood of functional decline (without complications: OR = 1.82 (95% CI, 1.22-2.71), and with complications: OR = 2.96 (95% CI, 1.70-5.14)). Increasing age also predicted greater odds of functional decline (OR = 2.09, per decade (95% CI, 1.57-2.80))., Limitations: The functional measures were self-reported by survey participants., Conclusions: High-risk colorectal surgery, without or with complications, is associated with increased likelihood of functional decline in older adults. Patient-centered decision-making should include discussion of expected functional outcomes and long-term disability. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B78. PÉRDIDA DE LA FUNCIONALIDAD A LARGO PLAZO LUEGO DE CIRUGÍA ELECTIVA COLORRECTAL DE ALTO RIESGO EN EL PACIENTE AÑOSO: Aunque en la mayoría de las investigaciones los resultados quirúrgicos se centran en los puntos finales clínicos y las complicaciones, actualmente se pueden valorar los resultados funcionales en el paciente añoso. Sin embargo, se sabe poco sobre el riesgo de la discapacidad funcional a largo plazo después de un procedimiento colorrectal.Comprender la incidencia y la probabilidad del deterioro funcional después de operaciones colorrectales de alto riesgo (es decir, ≥1% de mortalidad hospitalaria) con y sin complicaciones.Estudio de cohorte emparejado retrospectivo.El seguimiento longitudinal representativo a nivel nacional en adultos de >50 años y que recopila datos sobre su estado funcional, su estado cognitivo y su demografía, entre otros temas es el llamado "Estudio de Salud en jubilados." La encuesta se vinculó con los reclamos de Medicare y los datos del Índice Nacional de Defunciones entre 1992 y 2012.Aquellos de ≥65 años que se sometieron a cirugía colorrectal electiva de alto riesgo con un estado funcional medido antes y después de la cirugía. Estos pacientes se compararon 1: 3 con los encuestados que no se sometieron a cirugía mayor, según puntajes de propensión.La disminución functional como resultado primario, se definió como un aumento en el número de actividades de la vida diaria y actividades instrumentales de la vida diaria que requieren asistencia antes y después de la cirugía. Mediante la regresión logística, evaluamos si la cirugía sin complicaciones y/o con complicaciones se asoció con un deterioro funcional.Identificamos 289 pacientes que se sometieron a cirugía colorrectal de alto riesgo y 867 controles pareados. De los pacientes de cirugía, 90 (31%) experimentaron algun tipo de complicación. En comparación con los controles, los pacientes de cirugía experimentaron una mayor probabilidad de deterioro funcional (sin complicaciones: OR 1.82, IC 95% 1.22-2.71, y con complicaciones: OR 2.96, IC 95% 1.70-5.14). El aumento de la edad también predijo mayores probabilidades en el deterioro funcional (OR 2.09, por década, IC 95% 1.57-2.80).Las medidas funcionales fueron autoinformadas por los participantes de la encuesta.La cirugía colorrectal de alto riesgo, con o sin complicaciones, se asocia con una mayor probabilidad de deterioro funcional en adultos mayores. La toma de decisiones centradas en el paciente deben incluir la discusión de los resultados funcionales esperados y la discapacidad a largo plazo. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B78.

Identifying individuals with hereditary syndromes allows for improved cancer surveillance, risk reduction, and optimized management. Establishing criteria for assessment allows for the identification of individuals who are carriers of pathogenic genetic variants. The NCCN Guidelines for Genetic/Familial High-Risk Assessment: Colorectal provide recommendations for the assessment and management of patients with high-risk colorectal cancer syndromes. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on criteria for the evaluation of Lynch syndrome and considerations for use of multigene testing in the assessment of hereditary colorectal cancer syndromes.

Background: With improving survival from colorectal cancer, there is a growing population of patients undergoing surveillance. National accreditation organizations have increasingly endorsed formal survivorship care planning. To effectively design patient-centered survivorship programs, an understanding of the prevalence of unmet psychosocial and symptomatic needs is required., Objective: The aim of this study is to understand the breadth of unmet needs among survivors of colorectal cancer., Design: This is a cross-sectional survey of patients undergoing surveillance after curative-intent therapy for colorectal cancer., Setting: This study was conducted June 2017 to January 2018 at an academic cancer center., Patients: There were 99 patients (58 with colon cancer, 41 with rectal cancer)., Main Outcome Measures: We measured patient-reported unmet needs by using a modification of the Cancer Survivor Unmet Needs instrument, within domains of emotional (stress, concerns about recurrence), relationship (fertility, interpersonal), logistical (need for accessible parking, case management), financial, treatment-related (neuropathy, bowel function), and surveillance-related needs., Results: The mean (±SD) age was 58 (±12), and the time from diagnosis was 34 (±18) months. Overall, 74% of patients reported at least one unmet need, 49% reported emotional needs, 24% relationship needs, 24% financial needs, 25% logistical needs, and 33% surveillance needs. Thirty-six (62%) patients with colon cancer and 37 (90%) patients with rectal cancer reported at least one ongoing problem (p = 0.002). Thirty-five (82%) patients with rectal cancer reported an unmet treatment-related need in comparison with 23 (40%) patients with colon cancer (p < 0.001). The median (interquartile range) number of ongoing needs were 1 (0-5) in patients with colon cancer and 4 (2-8) in patients with rectal cancer (p = 0.007)., Limitations: This study was limited by its small sample size and lack of generalizability, given the tertiary care setting., Conclusions: The majority of colorectal cancer survivors reported unmet needs years after completion of curative-intent therapy. Patients with rectal cancer were significantly more likely to have unmet needs and may benefit from additional care during survivorship. Colorectal cancer survivorship programs should incorporate psychosocial and symptomatic care in addition to cancer surveillance. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A885.

Background: Bundled payment programs broaden hospitals' responsibility for spending to entire episodes of care. After demonstration programs in cardiac surgery and joint replacement, these payment reforms could soon extend to major operations like colectomy under Medicare's Bundled Payments for Care Improvement - Advanced Model., Objective: This study aims to evaluate how specific policies and surgical practice patterns would influence hospital reimbursement in a bundled payment program for colectomy., Design: This was a population-based study., Settings: We used national data from the 100% Medicare Provider Analysis and Review files for the years 2010 to 2014., Patients: We identified patients undergoing colon resections by using diagnosis-related group codes and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes., Main Outcome Measures: We simulated per case reconciliation payments as the difference between actual price-standardized 90-day episode payments and estimated regional spending benchmarks among fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries undergoing colectomy (2010-2014).We projected per patient and overall hospital-level reconciliation payments and the proportion of hospitals that would achieve shared savings under bundled payment conditions. We also assessed how variation in the use of laparoscopy could influence shared savings, using instrumental variable methods to account for selection bias between laparoscopic and open procedures., Results: Under simulated bundled payment conditions, 51.8% of hospitals would achieve shared savings, but the average case would incur a reconciliation penalty of -$234 (95% CI, -$245 to -$223). Risk adjustment would increase the proportion of hospitals with shared savings to 54.3% (per case payment, +$237; 95% CI, $96-$379). Hospitals performing a greater proportion of cases laparoscopically would achieve higher per case reconciliation payments. For example, per case reconciliation penalties would be -$472 (95% CI, -$506 to -$438) for hospitals that performed 10% of their procedures laparoscopically, whereas those that performed 70% laparoscopically would receive payments of +$294 (95% CI, $262-$326)., Limitations: Alternative payment models for colectomy have not yet been introduced., Conclusions: Surgical leaders must be prepared with strategies for optimizing episode efficiency. Inclusion of risk adjustment in bundled payment calculations and expanding utilization of laparoscopic surgery may represent approaches to achieve shared savings and improve surgeon engagement in alternative payment models for surgical care. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A928.

Purpose: To improve care coordination for complex cancers, it is critical to establish a more nuanced understanding of the types of providers involved. As the number of provider types increases, strategies to support cancer care coordination must adapt to a greater variety of information needs, communication styles, and treatment strategies., Methods: We categorized providers into 11 types, using National Provider Identifier specialties. Using Medicare claims, we counted the number of unique combinations of provider types billed during preoperative, operative, and postdischarge care for colon cancer surgery and assessed how this count varies across hospitals. The study included 70,567 beneficiaries in fee-for-service Medicare A and B for 6 months before and 60 days after an admission for colectomy for colon cancer between 2008 and 2011., Results: We observed 1,554 preoperative provider-type combinations, 975 operative combinations, and 1,571 postdischarge combinations. The three most common combinations in the preoperative phase were general medicine only, other medical specialists only, and general medicine and other medical specialists. In the operative phase, the three most common combinations were primary surgery, anesthesiology, and pathology; general medicine, other medical specialists, radiology, primary surgery, anesthesiology, and pathology; and other medical specialists, radiology, primary surgery, anesthesiology, and pathology. In the postdischarge phase, the three most common combinations were general medicine, general medicine and other medical specialists, and general medicine and oncology. On average, each hospital had 15 preoperative, 11 operative, and 15 postoperative combinations. High-volume, larger, teaching, urban, and noncritical access hospitals had more combinations in all phases., Conclusion: Many provider-type combinations are involved in colon cancer surgery care. Substantial variation exists across hospitals types, suggesting that certain hospitals need additional resources and more flexible infrastructure to coordinate care.

Regional clinical registries provide a unique opportunity for shared learning and population-based analyses of the quality of surgical care. Through the "Michigan Model" of pay for participation in strategic Value Partnerships, exemplified by the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC), the state's dominant private insurer, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, has sponsored 20 statewide clinical quality improvement collaboratives. MSQC represents a partnership among 73 Michigan hospitals with a robust data infrastructure and flexible platform for the promulgation of best practices in surgical quality improvement. This article will describe the organizational structure of the MSQC, the contributions the registry has made to quality improvement in colorectal surgery, and how future work will align to improve the reliability of improvement-relevant registry data.

Objective: To quantify the extent to which payments for laparoscopic and open colectomy are influenced by a surgeon's experience with laparoscopy., Background: Numerous studies suggest that healthcare costs for laparoscopic colectomy are lower than open surgery. None have assessed the importance of surgeon experience on the relative financial benefits of laparoscopy., Methods: We conducted a study of 182,852 national Medicare beneficiaries undergoing laparoscopic or open colectomy between 2010 and 2012. Using instrumental variable methods to account for selection bias, we compared Medicare payments for laparoscopic and open colectomy. We stratified our analysis by surgeons' annual experience with laparoscopic colectomy to determine the influence of provider experience on payments., Results: In the fully adjusted analysis, average episode payments per patient were $2640 [95% confidence interval (CI) -$4091 to -$1189] lower with the laparoscopic approach versus open. Surgeons in the highest quartile of laparoscopic experience demonstrated an average payment savings of $5456 per patient (CI -$7918 to -$2994) in their laparoscopic versus open cases. Among surgeons in the lowest quartile of laparoscopic experience, there was, however, no difference between laparoscopic and open cases (difference: $954, 95% CI -$731 to $2639). Differences in payments were explained by differences in complications rates. Both groups had similar rates of complications for open procedures (least experience, 21%, most experience, 21%; P = 0.45), but differed significantly on rates of complications for laparoscopic cases (least experience, 28%, most experience, 15%; P < 0.01)., Conclusions: This population-based study demonstrates that differences in payments between laparoscopic and open colectomy are influenced by surgeon experience. The laparoscopic approach does not reduce payments for patients whose surgeons have limited experience with the procedure.

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes of emergency operations performed at critical access and non-critical access hospitals., Background: Critical access hospitals are often the only source of surgical care for rural populations. Previous studies have demonstrated that patients undergoing common, elective operations at these rural hospitals have similar outcomes to their urban counterparts. Little is known, however, about the quality of care these hospitals provide for emergency operations for which they are most essential., Methods: We performed a cross-sectional retrospective review of 219,170 urgent or emergency colon resections among Medicare beneficiaries between 2009 and 2012. We compared mortality, serious complications, reoperation, and readmission rates at critical access and non-critical access hospitals using a multivariable logistic regression to adjust for patient factors (age, sex, race, Elixhauser comorbidities,) indication (cancer, diverticulitis, obstruction, inflammatory bowel disease, bleeding), year of operation, and type of operation., Results: Operative indications were similar at both critical access and non-critical access hospitals with the most common being cancer (38.5% vs 31.1%) followed by diverticulitis (26.9% vs 28.0%). Compared with patients treated at non-critical access hospitals, patients undergoing surgery at critical access hospitals were less likely to have multiple comorbid diseases (% of patients with 2 or more comorbid conditions, 67.5% vs 75.9%; P < 0.01). After accounting for these differences, patients in critical access hospitals had lower risk-adjusted 30-day mortality rates (14.3% vs 16.2%; P = 0.012) and lower rates of serious complications (11.1% vs 27.2%; P < 0.001). However, critical access hospitals had higher rates of reoperation (2.1% vs 1.4%; P = 0.009) and readmissions (22.3% vs 19.4%; P < 0.001)., Conclusions: For emergency colectomy procedures, Medicare beneficiaries in critical access hospitals experienced lower mortality rates but more frequent reoperation and readmission. These findings suggest that critical access hospitals provide safe, essential emergency surgical care, but may need more resources for postoperative care coordination in these high-risk operations.

Importance: Numerous study findings suggest that the use of laparoscopy is associated with lower health care costs for many operations, including colectomy. The extent to which these differences are due to the laparoscopic approach itself or selection bias from healthier patients undergoing the less invasive procedure is unclear., Objective: To evaluate the differences in Medicare expenditures for laparoscopic and open colectomy., Design, Setting, and Participants: A population-based study was conducted of Medicare beneficiaries undergoing laparoscopic or open colectomy between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2012. The dates of the analysis were November 13 to December 10, 2016. Using instrumental variable methods to account for selection bias, actual Medicare payments after each procedure were evaluated. To identify the mechanisms of potential cost savings, the frequency and amount of physician, readmission, and postacute care payments were evaluated. Several sensitivity analyses were performed restricting the study population by patient demographic or surgeon specialty., Main Outcomes and Measures: Actual Medicare expenditures up to 1 year after the index operation., Results: The study population included 428 799 patients (mean [SD] age, 74 [10] years; 57.0% female). When using standard methods, patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (vs open) had lower total Medicare expenditures (mean, -$5547; 95% CI, -$5408 to -$5684; P < .01). When using instrumental variable methods, which account for potentially unmeasured patient characteristics, patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy (vs open) still had lower Medicare expenditures (mean, -$3676; 95% CI, -$2444 to -$4907; P < .01), although the magnitude of the association was reduced. When examining the root causes of the difference in costs between patients who underwent laparoscopic and open colectomy, the key drivers were a reduction in costs from readmissions (mean, -$1102; 95% CI, -$1373 to -$831) and postacute care (mean, -$1446; 95% CI, -$1988 to -$935; P < .01)., Conclusions and Relevance: This population-based study demonstrates the influence of selection bias on cost estimates in comparative effectiveness research. While the use of laparoscopy reduced total episode payments, the source of savings is in the postacute care period, not the index hospitalization.

Importance: Minimally invasive colectomy (MIC) is an increasingly common surgical procedure. Although case series and controlled prospective trials have found the procedure to be safe, it is unclear whether safe adaptation of this approach from open colectomy (OC) is occurring among surgeons., Objective: To assess rates of complications for MIC compared with OC among surgeons., Design, Setting, and Participants: We analyzed 5196 patients who underwent MIC or OC from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2015, by 97 surgeons in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, with each surgeon performing at least 10 OCs and 10 MICs. Hierarchical regression was used to assess surgeon variation in adjusted rates of complications and the association of these outcomes across approaches., Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary study outcome measurements included overall 30-day complication rates, variation in complication rates among surgeons, and surgeon rank by complication rate for MIC vs OC., Results: Of the 5196 patients (mean [SD] age, 62.9 [14.4] years; 2842 [54.7%] female; 4429 [85.2%] white), 3118 (60.0%) underwent MIC and 2078 (40.0%) underwent OC. Overall, 1149 patients (22.1%) experienced complications (702 [33.8%] in the OC group vs 447 [14.3%] in the MIC group; P < .001). For MIC, the rates of complications varied from 8.8% to 25.9% among surgeons. For OC, rates of complications were higher but varied less (1.7-fold) among surgeons, ranging from 25.9% to 43.8%. Among the 97 surgeons ranked, the mean change in ranking between OC and MIC was 25 positions. The top 10 surgeons ranged in rank from 6 of 97 for OC to 89 of 97 for MIC., Conclusions and Relevance: Surgeon-level variation in complications was nearly twice as great for MIC than for OC among surgeons enrolled in a statewide quality collaborative. Moreover, surgeon rankings for OC outcomes differed substantially from outcomes for those same surgeons performing MIC. This finding implies a need for improved training in adoption of MIC techniques among some surgeons.

This review article focuses on gastroduodenal and pancreatic surgeries with the goal of identifying radiologic findings that translate to important surgical considerations. The topics covered include partial gastrectomy with reconstruction techniques, total gastrectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and pancreaticojejunostomy. Indications, contraindications, surgical techniques, and postoperative imaging are described within each of these topics. Knowledge of these surgical techniques is extremely helpful for the interpreting radiologists to identify expected postoperative anatomy and related complications that would remain clinically relevant to our surgical colleagues and direct timely patient management.

Background: Anastomotic leak is a major source of morbidity in colorectal operations and has become an area of interest in performance metrics. It is unclear whether anastomotic leak is associated primarily with surgeons' technical performance or explained better by patient characteristics and institutional factors. We sought to establish if anastomotic leak could serve as a valid quality metric in colorectal operations by evaluating provider variation after adjusting for patient factors., Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of colorectal resection patients in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Clinically relevant patient and operative factors were tested for association with anastomotic leak. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to derive risk-adjusted rates of anastomotic leak., Results: Of 9,192 colorectal resections, 244 (2.7%) had a documented anastomotic leak. The incidence of anastomotic leak was 3.0% for patients with pelvic anastomoses and 2.5% for those with intra-abdominal anastomoses. Multivariable analysis showed that a greater operative duration, male sex, body mass index >30 kg/m 2 , tobacco use, chronic immunosuppressive medications, thrombocytosis (platelet count >400 × 10 9 /L), and urgent/emergency operations were independently associated with anastomotic leak (C-statistic = 0.75). After accounting for patient and procedural risk factors, 5 hospitals had a significantly greater incidence of postoperative anastomotic leak., Conclusion: This population-based study shows that risk factors for anastomotic leak include male sex, obesity, tobacco use, immunosuppression, thrombocytosis, greater operative duration, and urgent/emergency operation; models including these factors predict most of the variation in anastomotic leak rates. This study suggests that anastomotic leak can serve as a valid metric that can identify opportunities for quality improvement., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This article discusses the commonly encountered operative procedures of the colon and urinary diversions and provides a comprehensive review of indications, contraindications, surgical techniques with emphasis on normal and abnormal multimodality imaging findings.

Background: Patients who undergo a colorectal operation that includes a new ileostomy incur high rates of readmission. Ostomates face a steep learning curve to master the skills and knowledge needed for success at home. We designed and implemented a patient-centered checklist promoting independence and validating self-care knowledge and care skills and evaluated its effect on readmissions after ileostomy creation., Methods: On a single inpatient unit, new ileostomy patients were taught and evaluated using a novel postoperative self-care checklist, while perioperative care for ostomates remained unchanged elsewhere in the institution. In a retrospective cohort including all consecutive ileostomy patients from 2 years before (period 1) and 1 year after (period 2) the checklist implementation, we identified univariable predictors of readmission within 30 days of discharge and used a multivariable, difference-in-differences approach to compare trends in readmission between the intervention and control units., Results: Of the 430 patients in the study period, there were 116 with readmissions (26%). Readmitted patients had significantly greater all patient refined diagnosis related group weights (3.6 vs 3.3, P = .006) and longer initial duration of stay (13.3 vs 11.3 days, P = .006), and they were more likely to be emergency admissions (49% vs 38%, P = .04). The readmission rate on the intervention unit decreased from 28% in period 1 to 20% in period 2. The logistic regression-based difference-in-differences approach revealed that implementation of the checklist was an independent negative predictor of readmission (P = .04)., Conclusion: Implementation of a patient-centered, self-care-oriented postoperative education checklist was associated with significantly reduced odds of readmission after ileostomy creation., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To summarize the magnitude and time trends of endoscopy-related claims and to compare total malpractice indemnity according to specialty and procedure., Methods: We obtained data from a comprehensive database of closed claims from a trade association of professional liability insurance carriers, representing over 60% of practicing United States physicians. Total payments by procedure and year were calculated, and were adjusted for inflation (using the Consumer Price Index) to 2008 dollars. Time series analysis was performed to assess changes in the total value of claims for each type of procedure over time., Results: There were 1901 endoscopy-related closed claims against all providers from 1985 to 2008. The specialties include: internal medicine (n = 766), gastroenterology (n = 562), general surgery (n = 231), general and family practice (n = 101), colorectal surgery (n = 87), other specialties (n = 132), and unknown (n = 22). Colonoscopy represented the highest frequencies of closed claims (n = 788) and the highest total indemnities ($54 093 000). In terms of mean claims payment, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) ranked the highest ($374  794) per claim. Internists had the highest number of total claims (n = 766) and total claim payment ($70  730  101). Only total claim payments for colonoscopy and ERCP seem to have increased over time. Indeed, there was an average increase of 15.5% per year for colonoscopy and 21.9% per year for ERCP after adjusting for inflation., Conclusion: There appear to be differences in malpractice coverage costs among specialties and the type of endoscopic procedure. There is also evidence for secular trend in total claim payments, with colonoscopy and ERCP costs rising yearly even after adjusting for inflation.