Alvimopan in the setting of colorectal resection with an ostomy: To use or not to use?

Overall readmissions and readmissions related to dehydration after creation of an ileostomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Hospital readmissions after creation of an ileostomy are common and come with a high clinical and financial burden. The aim of this review with pooled analysis was to determine the incidence of dehydration-related and all-cause readmissions after formation of an ileostomy, and the associated costs.

Methods

A systematic literature search was conducted for studies reporting on dehydration-related and overall readmission rates after formation of a loop or end ileostomy between January 1990 and April 2021. Analyses were performed using R Statistical Software Version 3.6.1.

Results

The search yielded 71 studies (n = 82,451 patients). The pooled incidence of readmissions due to dehydration was 6% (95% CI 0.04–0.09) within 30 days, with an all-cause readmission rate of 20% (CI 95% 0.18–0.23). Duration of readmissions for dehydration ranged from 2.5 to 9 days. Average costs of dehydration-related readmission were between $2750 and $5924 per patient. Other indications for readmission within 30 days were specified in 15 studies, with a pooled incidence of 5% (95% CI 0.02–0.14) for dehydration, 4% (95% CI 0.02–0.08) for stoma outlet problems, and 4% (95% CI 0.02–0.09) for infections.

Conclusions

One in five patients are readmitted with a stoma-related complication within 30 days of creation of an ileostomy. Dehydration is the leading cause for these readmissions, occurring in 6% of all patients within 30 days. This comes with high health care cost for a potentially avoidable cause. Better monitoring, patient awareness and preventive measures are required.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10151-022-02580-6.

Selective Opioid Antagonists Following Bowel Resection for Prevention of Postoperative Ileus: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) remains a common complication following bowel resection. Selective opioid antagonists have been increasingly studied as prophylactic pharmaceutical aids to reduce rates of POI. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of selective opioid antagonists on return of bowel function following bowel resection.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were systematically searched. Articles were included if they compared the incidence of POI and/or length of stay (LOS) in patients receiving and not receiving selective opioid antagonists following elective bowel resection. A pairwise meta-analyses using inverse variance random effects was performed.

RESULTS

From 636 citations, 30 studies with 45,051 patients receiving selective opioid antagonists (51.3% female, mean age: 60.9) and 55,071 patients not receiving selective opioid antagonists (51.2% female, mean age: 61.1) were included. Patients receiving selective opioid antagonists had a significantly lower rate of POI (10.1% vs. 13.8%, RR 0.68, 95%CI 0.63-0.75, p < 0.01). Selective opioid antagonists also significantly reduced LOS (MD - 1.08, 95%CI - 1.47 to - 0.69, p < 0.01), readmission (RR 0.94, 95%CI 0.89-0.99, p = 0.03), and 30-day morbidity (RR 0.85, 95%CI 0.79-0.90, p < 0.01). Improvements in LOS, readmission rate, and morbidity were not significant when analysis was limited to laparoscopic surgery. There was no significant difference in inpatient healthcare costs (SMD - 0.33, 95%CI - 0.71-0.04, p = 0.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Rate of POI decreases with the use of selective opioid antagonists in patients undergoing bowel resection. Selective opioid antagonists also improve LOS, rates of readmission, and 30-day morbidity for patients undergoing open bowel resection. Addition of these medications to enhance recovery after surgery protocols should be considered.

Comparison of treatment to improve gastrointestinal functions after colorectal surgery within enhanced recovery programmes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite a significant improvement with enhanced recovery programmes (ERP), gastro-intestinal (GI) functions that are impaired after colorectal resection and postoperative ileus (POI) remain a significant issue. In the literature, there is little evidence of the distinction between the treatment assessed within or outside ERP. The purpose was to evaluate the efficiency of treatments to reduce POI and improve GI function recovery within ERP. A search was performed in PubMed and Scopus on 20 September 2019. The studies were included if they compared the effect of the administration of a treatment aiming to treat or prevent POI or improve the early functional outcomes of colorectal surgery within an ERP. The main outcome measures were the occurrence of postoperative ileus, time to first flatus and time to first bowel movement. Treatments that were assessed at least three times were included in a meta-analysis. Among the analysed studies, 28 met the eligibility criteria. Six of them focused on chewing-gum and were only randomized controlled trials (RCT) and 8 of them focused on Alvimopan but none of them were RCT. The other measures were assessed in less than 3 studies over RCTs (n = 11) or retrospective studies (n = 2). In the meta-analysis, chewing gum had no significant effect on the endpoints and Alvimopan allowed a significant reduction of the occurrence of POI. Chewing-gum was not effective on GI function recovery in ERP but Alvimopan and the other measures were not sufficiently studies to draw conclusion. Randomised controlled trials are needed.Systematic review registration number CRD42020167339.

The association of alvimopan treatment with postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery: A systematic review across different surgical procedures and contexts of perioperative care

BACKGROUND

Alvimopan is a Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment to accelerate gastrointestinal recovery after abdominal surgery; however, benefits may vary across different procedures and contexts of care. The purpose of this study is to summarize the evidence regarding the effect of alvimopan on postoperative outcomes after abdominal surgery.

METHODS

Major databases (Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched for randomized controlled trials and nonrandomized studies comparing alvimopan versus control. Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool 2.0 (for randomized controlled trials) and Risk of Bias in Nonrandomized Studies-of Intervention tool (for nonrandomized studies). Results were appraised descriptively as heterogeneity in reporting and risk of bias hindered meta-analysis. Quality of evidence across different surgical procedures and contexts of care (ie, open versus minimally invasive surgery, traditional care versus enhanced recovery pathway) was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials and 35 nonrandomized studies were identified. Evidence of low to moderate certainty supports that alvimopan reduces length of stay and improves gastrointestinal recovery after open bowel resection and open radical cystectomy. Limited evidence supports alvimopan for surgeries not listed in Food and Drug Administration labels (ie, total abdominal hysterectomy and retroperitoneal lymph node dissection). Similar effects were observed in traditional and enhanced recovery pathway settings, but enhanced recovery pathway elements varied across studies. There is very low certainty of evidence supporting alvimopan for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports that alvimopan improves outcomes after open bowel resection and open radical cystectomy. Benefits for patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery and treated in contemporary enhanced recovery pathway settings remain uncertain. These findings contribute important new knowledge to inform evidence-based alvimopan prescribing.

Alvimopan, Regardless of Ileus Risk, Significantly Impacts Ileus, Length of Stay, and Readmission After Intestinal Surgery

BACKGROUND

Previous analyses evaluating alvimopan included patients at varying risk for ileus after intestinal resection, which may have precluded its widespread adoption. We assess the early and delayed effects of alvimopan in patients stratified by risk for ileus after intestinal and colon resection.

METHODS

From the Premier Perspective database, patients with elective small and large bowel resections from 2012 to 2014 were identified. Multivariable analysis identified 14 perioperative risk factors for postoperative ileus. Within low- (0-4 factors), intermediate- (5 factors), and high-risk (6-12 factors) ileus categories, alvimopan and no-alvimopan patients were propensity-score matched for demographics, morbidities, diagnosis, surgery and approach, postoperative complications, surgeon specialty, and hospital features. In-hospital postoperative ileus, length of stay, discharge destination, and ileus-related readmission were compared.

RESULTS

Of 52,948 patients, 15,719 (29.7%) received alvimopan. Risk for ileus in low- (18,784), intermediate- (14,370), and high-risk (19,794) categories was 8.9, 13, and 22% (p ≤ .0001) respectively. After matching, alvimopan was associated with significantly reduced in-hospital postoperative ileus in all (low, 6%; intermediate, 9.4%; and high risk, 16.2%) categories. Hospital stay and 30-, 60-, and 90-day postdischarge ileus were also significantly lower with alvimopan. For low-risk patients, alvimopan increased discharge to home, while 90-day emergency readmission was reduced.

CONCLUSIONS

Alvimopan, regardless of ileus risk, improves ileus, hospital stay, and ileus-related readmission after intestinal resection and these effects are sustained over the long term. Since fewer than a third of patients currently receive alvimopan, its routine adoption with small and large intestinal resection will significantly impact patients and health systems.