Standardized postoperative pathway: accelerating recovery after ileostomy closure

Clinical impact of a multimodal pain management protocol for loop ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

As introduced, multimodal pain management bundle for ileostomy reversal may be considered to reduce postoperative pain and hospital stay. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical efficacy of perioperative multimodal pain bundle for ileostomy.

METHODS

Medical records of patients who underwent ileostomy reversal after rectal cancer surgery from April 2017 to March 2020 were analyzed. Sixty-seven patients received multimodal pain bundle protocol with ileostomy reversal (group A) and 41 patients underwent closure of ileostomy with conventional pain management (group B).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics, including age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, diabetes mellitus, and smoking history, were not significantly different between the groups. The pain score on postoperative day 1 was significant lower in group A (visual analog scale, 2.6 ± 1.3 vs. 3.2 ± 1.2; P = 0.013). Overall consumption of opioid in group A was significant less than group B (9.7 ± 9.5 vs. 21.2 ± 8.8, P < 0.001). Hospital stay was significantly shorter in group A (2.3 ± 1.5 days vs. 4.1 ± 1.5 days, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between the groups in postoperative complication rate.

CONCLUSION

Multimodal pain protocol for ileostomy reversal could reduce postoperative pain, usage of opioid and hospital stay compared to conventional pain management.

Loop Ileostomy Closure as a 23-Hour Stay Procedure With Preoperative Efferent Limb Enteral Stimulation: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Loop ileostomy closure is a common procedure in colorectal surgery. Often seen as a simple operation associated with a low complication rate, it still leads to lengthy hospitalizations. Reducing postoperative complications and ileus rates could lead to a shorter length of stay and even ambulatory surgery.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the safety and feasibility of ileostomy closure performed in a 23-hour hospitalization setting using a standardized enhanced recovery pathway.

DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS

Two high-volume colorectal surgery centers.

PATIENTS

Healthy adults undergoing elective ileostomy closure from July 2019 to January 2022.

INTERVENTION

All patients were enrolled in a standardized enhanced recovery pathway specific to ileostomy closure, including daily irrigation of efferent limb with a nutritional formula for 7 days before surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to either conventional hospitalization (n = 23) or a 23-hour stay (n = 24).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Primary outcome was total length of stay and secondary outcomes were 30-day rates of readmission, postoperative ileus, surgical site infections, and postoperative morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

A total of 47 patients were ultimately randomly allocated. Patients in the 23-hour hospitalization arm had a shorter median length of stay (1 vs 2 days, p = 0.02) and similar rates of readmission (4% vs 13%, p = 0.35), postoperative ileus (none in both arms), surgical site infection (0% vs 4%, p = 0.49), postoperative morbidity (21% vs 22%, p = 1.00), and mortality (none in both arms).

LIMITATIONS

Due to coronavirus disease 2019, access to surgical beds was greatly limited, leading to a shift toward ambulatory surgery for ileostomy closure. The study was terminated early, which affected its statistical power.

CONCLUSION

Loop ileostomy closures as 23-hour stay procedures are feasible and safe. Ileus rate might be reduced by preoperative intestinal stimulation with nutritional formula through the stoma's efferent limb, although specific randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this association. See Video Abstract .

CIERRE DE ILEOSTOMA EN ASA COMO PROCEDIMIENTO AMBULATORIO DE HORAS CON ESTMULO PREOPERATORIO ENTERAL EFERENTE ESTUDIO ALEATORIO CONTROLADO

ANTECEDENTES:El cierre de la ileostomía en asa es un procedimiento común en la cirugía colorrectal. A menudo vista como una operación simple asociada con bajas tasas de complicaciones, aún conduce a largas hospitalizaciones. La reducción de las complicaciones postoperatorias y las tasas de íleo podría conducir a una estadía hospitalaria más corta o incluso a una cirugía ambulatoria.OBJETIVOS:El presente estudio pretende evaluar la seguridad y la viabilidad del cierre de ileostomía realizadas en un entorno de hospitalización de 23 horas utilizando una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada.DISEÑO:Estudio aleatorio controladoAJUSTES:Dos centros de cirugía colorrectal de gran volúmenPACIENTES:Adultos sanos sometidos a cierre electivo de ileostomía, desde Julio de 2019 hasta Enero de 2022.INTERVENCIÓN:Todos los pacientes fueron inscritos en una vía de recuperación mejorada y estandarizada específica para el cierre de la ileostomía, incluyendo la irrigación diaria de la extremidad eferente del intestino asociada a una fórmula nutricional durante 7 días previos a la cirugía. Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente en hospitalización convencional (n = 23) o a una estadía de 23 horas (n = 24).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado primario fue la duración total de la estadía hospitalaria y los resultados secundarios fueron las tasas de reingreso a los 30 días, el íleo postoperatorio, las infecciones de la herida quirúrgica, la morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Finalmente fueron randomizados un total de 47 pacientes. Aquellos que se encontraban en el grupo de hospitalización de 23 horas tuvieron una estadía media más corta (1 día versus 2 días, p = 0,02) y tasas similares de reingreso (4% vs 13%, p = 0,35), de íleo postoperatorio (ninguno en ambos brazos), de infección del sitio quirúrgico (0 vs 4%, p = 0,49), de morbilidad postoperatoria (21% vs 22%, p > 0,99) y de mortalidad (ninguna en ambos brazos).LIMITACIONES:Debido a la pandemia SARS CoV-2, el acceso a las camas quirúrgicas fue muy limitado, lo que llevó a un cambio hacia la cirugía ambulatoria para el cierre de ileostomías. El estudio finalizó anticipadamente, lo que afectó su poder estadístico.CONCLUSIÓN:Los cierres de ileostomía en asa como procedimientos de estadía de 23 horas son factibles y seguros. La tasa de íleo podría reducirse mediante la estimulación intestinal preoperatoria a través de la rama eferente del estoma asociada a fórmulas nutricionales, por lo que se necesitan estudios randomizados específicos para confirmar esta asociación. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Comparison of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Pathway Versus Standard Care in Patients Undergoing Elective Stoma Reversal Surgery- A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Practices such as prolonged preoperative fasting, bowel preparation, delayed ambulation and resumption of orals result in morbidity in 15-20% of stoma reversal cases which can be improved by Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways.

AIM

To evaluate the safety, feasibility and efficacy of ERAS pathway in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery METHODS: This was an open-labeled, superiority randomized controlled trial in which patients undergoing loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal were randomized to standard or ERAS care. Patients with ASA class ≥3, needing laparotomy for stoma reversal, cardiac, renal and neurological illnesses were excluded. Components of ERAS protocol included pre-operative carbohydrate loading, avoidance of mechanical bowel preparation, goal directed fluid therapy, avoidance of long-acting opioid anesthetics or analgesics, avoidance of drains, urinary catheter or nasogastric tube, early mobilization and early enteral feeding. The primary outcome was length of stay (LOS) while the secondary outcomes were postoperative recovery and morbidity parameters.

RESULTS

Forty patients each were randomized to standard care and ERAS. Demographic and laboratory parameters between the two groups were comparable. ERAS group patients had significantly reduced LOS (5.3 ± 0.3 vs 7 ± 2.6; mean difference: 1.73 ± 0.98; p=0.0008). Functional recovery was earlier in the ERAS group compared to the standard care group, such as early resolution of ileus (median-2 days; p<0.001), time to first stool (median-3 days; p=0.0002), time to the resumption of liquid diet (median-3 days; p<0.001) and solid diet (median-4 days; p<0.001). Surgical site infections (SSI) were significantly lesser in ERAS group (12.5% vs 32.5%; p=0.03) while postoperative nausea/vomiting (p=0.08), pulmonary complications (p=0.17) and urinary tract infections (p=0.56) were comparable in both groups.

CONCLUSION

ERAS pathways are feasible, safe and significantly reduces LOS in patients undergoing elective loop ileostomy or colostomy reversal surgery.

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

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

Short-stay compared to long-stay admissions for loop ileostomy reversals: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Short-stay admissions, with lengths of stay less than 24 h, are used for various surgeries without increasing adverse events. However, it is unclear if short-stay admissions would be safe for loop ileostomy reversals. This review aimed to compare outcomes between short (≤24 hours) and long (>24 hours) admissions for adults undergoing loop ileostomy reversals.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for studies comparing short- to long-stay admissions in adults undergoing loop ileostomy reversals. Meta-analyses were conducted for mortality, reoperation, readmission, and non-reoperative complications. Quality of evidence was assessed with grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluations (GRADE) guidelines.

RESULTS

Four observational studies enrolling 24,628 patients were included. Moderate certainty evidence suggests there is no difference in readmissions between short- and long-stay admissions (relative risk (RR) 0.98, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.28, p 0.86). Low certainty evidence demonstrates that short stays may reduce non-reoperative complications (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.62, p < 0.01). Very low certainty evidence demonstrates that there is no difference in reoperations between short and long stays (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.26 to 5.04, p 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate certainty evidence demonstrates that there is no difference in readmission rates between short- and long-stay admissions for loop ileostomy reversals. Less robust evidence suggests equivalence in reoperations and a decrease in non-reoperative complications. Future prospective trials are required to evaluate the feasibility and efficacy of short-stay admissions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=307381 Prospero (CRD42022307381), January 30, 2022.

Effects of anchoring sutures at diverting ileostomy after rectal cancer surgery on peritoneal adhesion at following ileostomy reversal

PURPOSE

During diverting ileostomy reversal for rectal cancer patients who underwent previous sphincter-saving surgery, the extent of adhesion formation around the ileostomy site affects operative and postoperative outcomes. Anchoring sutures placed at the time of the ileostomy procedure may reduce adhesions around the ileostomy. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of anchoring sutures on the degree of adhesion formation and the postoperative course at the time of ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

Patients who underwent sphincter-saving surgery with diverting ileostomy for rectal cancer between January 2013 and December 2017 were enrolled. Variables including the peritoneal dhesion index (PAI) score, operation time, the length of resected small bowel, operative complications, and postoperative hospital stay were collected prospectively and compared between the anchoring group (AG) and non-anchoring group (NAG).

RESULTS

A total of 90 patients were included in this study, with 60 and 30 patients in the AG and NAG, respectively. The AG had shorter mean operation time (46.88 ± 16.37 minutes vs. 61.53 ± 19.36 minutes, P = 0.001) and lower mean PAI score (3.02 ± 2.53 vs. 5.80 ± 2.60, P = 0.001), compared with the NAG. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the AG and NAG (5.0% vs. 13.3%, respectively; P = 0.240).

CONCLUSION

Anchoring sutures at the formation of a diverting ileostomy could decrease the adhesion score and operation time at ileostomy reversal, thus may be effective in improving perioperative outcomes.

Algorithmic approaches to ostomy management: An integrative review

Objective

The aim of this review is to describe approaches to ostomy management utilizing algorithmic approaches found within the literature.

Design

An integrative review approach was used based on a modified Cooper's five‐stage research review framework.

Data Sources

Systematic searches occurred using the CINAHL and MEDLINE databases searching for peer‐reviewed, English publications.

Review Methods

There were 640 articles identified through the review process, 608 of which were excluded based on title and abstract review. The remaining 12 articles were assessed in full text after which two studies were removed as duplicates and six studies were excluded based on inclusion/exclusion criteria. Four studies were included in this synthesis. Studies were critically analysed using a critical appraisal tool developed for both qualitative and quantitative study assessments.

Results

Utilizing inductive content analysis, included literature was presented within two categories: validation of ostomy algorithms and implementation of ostomy algorithms in practice. Four themes emerged from these categories including the following: algorithm validation, identifying underlying causes, focus on accessories and large‐scale implementation.

Conclusion

No currently available validated algorithms published in full were found during this literature review. Current literature demonstrates the potential benefit for ostomy management algorithms to standardize and improve ostomy patient care.

Impact

This study sought to determine the availability and supporting research of ostomy management algorithms which may assist in standardizing and improving ostomy care. This review has demonstrated a lack of available ostomy management algorithms. Given the potential benefit of ostomy algorithms identified within the literature, further studies should be completed to develop, validate and test new ostomy management algorithms.

The Impact of an Enhanced Recovery Program on Loop Ileostomy Closure

BACKGROUND

The implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols has decreased the length of stay (LOS) and complications in colorectal procedures. However, little data has been published on the subset of patients undergoing loop ileostomy closure. We investigated the outcomes of loop ileostomy reversals prior to and after initiation of an ERAS protocol.

METHODS

Patients undergoing ileostomy reversal over a 5-year period by 4 colorectal surgeons were studied and divided into pre-ERAS patients and ERAS patients in a retrospective, case-control study. Patient demographics, comorbidities, LOS, underlying disease process, index intra-abdominal procedure, readmission rate, and complications were evaluated.

RESULTS

Overall, 208 patients were analyzed 149 pre-ERAS and 59 ERAS-with median LOS significantly lower in the ERAS group than the pre-ERAS group (50.8 hours vs. 96.1 hours, P < .0001). In subgroup analysis, the LOS was significantly lower if the index procedure performed was laparoscopic when comparing ERAS to pre-ERAS (49.9 hours vs. 96.6 hours, P < .001). ERAS did not confer a significant decrease in the LOS during ileostomy reversal with open index procedures (72.9 hours vs. 95.5 hours, P = .05).

CONCLUSION

Utilizing an ERAS protocol is safe and effective for loop ileostomy closure with a shorter LOS and no difference in complication rates or 30-day readmission rates.

IMPROVED OUTCOMES WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF AN ENHANCED RECOVERY AFTER SURGERY (ERAS) PATHWAY FOR PATIENTS UNDERGOING ELECTIVE COLORECTAL SURGERY IN THE PHILIPPINES

Objective

This study aims to evaluate surgical outcomes (i.e. length of stay, 30-day morbidity, mortality, reoperation, and readmission rates) with the use of the ERAS pathway, and determine its association with the rate of compliance to the different ERAS components.

Methodology

This was a prospective cohort of patients, who underwent the following elective procedures: stoma reversal (SR), colon resection (CR), and rectal resection (RR). The primary endpoint was to determine the association of compliance to an ERAS pathway and surgical outcomes. These were then compared to outcomes prior to the implementation of ERAS.

Results

A total of 267 patients were included in the study. The overall compliance to the ERAS component was 92% (SR:91.75%, CR:93.06%, RR:90.65%). There was an associated decrease in morbidity rates across all types of surgery, as compliance to ERAS increased. The average total LOS decreased in all groups but was only found to have statistical significance in SR (12.06 ± 6.67 vs 10.02 ± 5.43 days; p=0.002) and RR (19.85 ± 11.38 vs 16.85 ± 10.45 days; p=0.04) groups. Decreased postoperative LOS was noted in all groups. Morbidity rates were significantly higher after ERAS implementation, but reoperation and mortality rates were found to be similar.

Conclusion

Implementation of ERAS improved outcomes, particularly length of stay. Although an actual increase in morbidity was noted, that may be explained by the improved reporting and documentation that accompanied the implementation of the protocol, a decreased likelihood of developing complications is foreseen with increased compliance to ERAS.

Intrinsic predictors of prolonged length of stay in a colorectal enhanced recovery pathway: a prospective cohort study and multivariate analysis

AIM

This was a prospective cohort study to determine the intrinsic non-modifiable factors influencing length of stay (LOS) in unselected consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery pathway.

METHODS

This study interrogated a prospective database of consecutive elective procedures from October 2006 to April 2011 at a tertiary referral academic hospital in the UK to identify independent predictors of prolonged length of stay (pLOS). pLOS was defined as longer than median length of stay (mLOS). Differences in determinants were identified in three groups of increasing operative complexity.

RESULTS

In all, 872 procedures were identified and ranged from a simple ileostomy reversal to complex total pelvic exenteration. Preoperative anaemia and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade III+ predicted pLOS in stoma reversal surgery patients (n = 191, mLOS 4 days). In colonic and small bowel surgery (n = 444, mLOS 8 days), an open procedure, new stoma formation, planned critical care admission and ASA III+ predicted pLOS. New stoma formation and planned critical care admission predicted pLOS in patients undergoing pelvic rectal surgery (n = 237, mLOS 11 days). pLOS was associated with significantly higher morbidity across Dindo-Clavien grades and a longer time to postoperative functional recovery and discharge.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative complexity is associated with longer LOS even with an established enhanced recovery pathway in place. Intrinsic non-modifiable predictors of pLOS differ with operative complexity, and this should be taken into account when planning benchmarking and research across units.

Prediction model and web-based risk calculator for postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure

Background

Postoperative ileus (POI) is a significant complication after loop ileostomy closure given both its frequency and impact on the patient. The purpose of this study was to develop and externally validate a prediction model for POI after loop ileostomy closure.

Methods

The model was developed and validated according to the TRIPOD checklist for prediction model development and validation. The development cohort included consecutive patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure in two teaching hospitals in Montreal, Canada. Candidate variables considered for inclusion in the model were chosen a priori based on subject knowledge. The final prediction model, which modelled the 30-day cumulative incidence of POI using logistic regression, was selected using the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) criterion. Model calibration was assessed using the Hosmer–Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test. The model was then validated externally in an independent cohort of similar patients from the University of British Columbia.

Results

The development cohort included 531 patients, in whom the incidence of POI was 16·8 per cent. The final model included five variables: age, ASA fitness grade, underlying pathology/treatment, interval between ileostomy creation and closure, and duration of surgery for ileostomy closure (AUC 0·68, 95 per cent c.i. 0·61 to 0·74). The model demonstrated good calibration (P = 0·142). The validation cohort consisted of 216 patients, and the incidence of POI was 15·7 per cent. On external validation, the model maintained good discrimination (AUC 0·72, 0·63 to 0·81) and calibration (P = 0·538).

Conclusion

A prediction model was developed for POI after loop ileostomy closure and included five variables. The model maintained good performance on external validation.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of incisional hernia post-reversal of ileostomy

PURPOSE

Incisional hernia following closure of loop ileostomy is a common problem. Assessment of the proportion of this complication is limited by small sample size and inconsistent reporting. The aim of this review was to provide an estimate of the proportion of incisional hernia following closure of loop ileostomy according to clinical and radiological diagnostic criteria and to investigate the association of bibliometric and study quality parameters with reported proportion.

METHODS

A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, ISRCTN Registry and Open Grey from 2000 onwards was performed according to PRISMA standards. Reporting on the type of stoma and mesh reinforcement after closure was mandatory for inclusion, whereas studies on paediatric populations were excluded. Fixed effect or random effects models were used to calculate pooled proportion estimates. Meta-regression models were formed to explore potential heterogeneity.

RESULTS

42 studies with 7166 patients were included. The pooled estimate of the proportion of incisional hernia after ileostomy closure was 6.1% (95% confidence interval, CI 4.4-8.3%). Proportion estimates for higher quality studies and studies reporting on incisional hernia as primary outcome were 9.0% (95% CI 6.3-12.7%) and 13.1% (95% CI 8.8-19.1%). Significant between-study heterogeneity was identified (P < 0.001, I² = 87%) and the likelihood of publication bias was high (P = 0.028). Mixed effects regression showed that both year of publication (P = 0.034, Q = 4.484, df = 1.000) and defining hernia as a primary outcome (Q = 20.298, P < 0.001) were related to effect size. Method of follow-up and quality of the studies affected the proportion.

CONCLUSION

The proportion of incisional hernia at ileostomy closure site is estimated at 6.1%. Reporting incisional hernia as primary or secondary outcome, the method of diagnosis, the year of publication and methodological quality are associated with reported proportion.

Incidence and predictors of postoperative ileus after loop ileostomy closure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Postoperative ileus (POI) is regarded as the most clinically significant morbidity following loop ileostomy closure; however, its incidence remains poorly understood. Our objective was therefore to determine the pooled incidence of POI after loop ileostomy closure and identify risk factors associated with its development.

METHODS

We systematically searched MEDLINE (via Ovid and PubMed), Embase, the Cochrane Library, Biosis Previews, and Scopus to identify studies reporting the incidence of POI in patients who underwent loop ileostomy closure. Two independent reviewers extracted data and appraised study quality. Cumulative incidence proportions were pooled across studies using a random-effects meta-analytic model.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven studies, including 9528 patients, met our inclusion criteria. The pooled estimate of POI was 8.0% (95% CI 6.9-9.3%; I² = 74%). The estimated incidence varied by POI definition: studies with a robust definition of POI (n = 8) demonstrated the highest estimate of POI (12.4%, 95% CI 9.2-16.5%; I² = 79%) while studies that did not report an explicit POI definition (n = 38) demonstrated the lowest estimate (6.7%, 95% CI 5.3-8.3%; I² = 61%). Small bowel anastomosis technique (hand-sewn) and interval time from ileostomy creation to closure (longer time) were the factors most commonly associated with POI after loop ileostomy closure. However, most comparative studies were not powered to examine risk factors for POI.

CONCLUSIONS

POI is an important complication after loop ileostomy closure, and its incidence is dependent on its definition. More research aimed at studying this complication is required to better understand risk factors for POI after loop ileostomy closure.

Health Care Policy and Outcomes after Colon and Rectal Surgery: What Is the Bigger Picture?-Cost Containment, Incentivizing Value, Transparency, and Centers of Excellence

Early in the 21st century, the costs of health care in the United States have spiraled out of control, where the per capita spending is $9,237 per person-the highest in the world. By 2020, an estimated 20% of GDP will be spent on health care. The issue of cost and quality is now becoming a national crisis, with ∼50% of hospitals losing money on clinical operations, forcing closure of essential critical access hospitals, and forcing health care workers to relocate or change professions. This crisis will only worsen with the graying of America, as an estimated 17% of Americans will be over the age of 65 years by the year 2020. The policy and financial structures on which these changes are based are important factors of which practicing surgeons should be aware. This review discusses recent national health care policy reform and specific topics including cost-containment legislation, value-based incentives and penalties, transparency, and centers of excellence in colorectal surgery.

Enhanced Recovery after Colorectal Surgery: Can We Afford Not to Use It?

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) aim to reduce length of stay without adversely affecting short-term outcomes. High pharmaceutical costs associated with ERP regimens, however, remain a significant barrier to widespread implementation. We hypothesized that ERP would reduce hospital costs after elective colorectal resections, despite the use of more expensive pharmaceutical agents.

STUDY DESIGN

An ERP was implemented in January 2016 at our institution. We collected data on consecutive colorectal resections for 1 year before adoption of ERP (traditional, n = 160) and compared them with consecutive resections after universal adoption of ERP (n = 146). Short-term surgical outcomes, total direct costs, and direct hospital pharmacy costs were compared between patients who received the ERP and those who did not.

RESULTS

After implementation of the ERP, median length of stay decreased from 5.0 to 3.0 days (p < 0.01). There were no differences in 30-day complications (8.1% vs 8.9%) or hospital readmission (11.9% vs 11.0%). The ERP patients required significantly less narcotics during their index hospitalization (211.7 vs 720.2 morphine equivalence units; p < 0.01) and tolerated a regular diet 1 day sooner (p < 0.01). Despite a higher daily pharmacy cost ($477 per day vs $318 per day in the traditional cohort), the total direct pharmacy cost for the hospitalization was reduced in ERP patients ($1,534 vs $1,859; p = 0.016). Total direct cost was also lower in ERP patients ($9,791 vs $11,508; p = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an ERP for patients undergoing elective colorectal resection substantially reduced length of stay, total hospital cost, and direct pharmacy cost without increasing complications or readmission rates. Enhanced recovery pathway after colorectal resection has both clinical and financial benefits. Widespread implementation has the potential for a dramatic impact on healthcare costs.

Home visits as part of a new care pathway (iAID) to improve quality of care and quality of life in ostomy patients: a cluster-randomized stepped-wedge trial

AIM

Morbidity in patients with an ostomy is high. A new care pathway, including perioperative home visits by enterostomal therapists, was studied to assess whether more elaborate education and closer guidance could reduce stoma-related complications and improve quality of life (QoL), at acceptable cost.

METHOD

Patients requiring an ileostomy or colostomy, for any inflammatory or malignant bowel disease, were included in a 15-centre cluster-randomized 'stepped-wedge' study. Primary outcomes were stoma-related complications and QoL, measured using the Stoma-QOL, 3 months after surgery. Secondary outcomes included costs of care.

RESULTS

The standard pathway (SP) was followed by 113 patients and the new pathway (NP) by 105 patients. Although the overall number of stoma-related complications was similar in both groups (SP 156, NP 150), the proportion of patients experiencing one or more stoma-related complications was significantly higher in the NP (72% vs 84%, risk difference 12%; 95% CI: 0.3-23.3%). Although in the NP more patients had stoma-related complications, QoL scores were significantly better (P < 0.001). In the SP more patients required extra care at home for their ostomy than in the NP (60.6% vs 33.7%, respectively; risk difference 26.9%, 95% CI: 13.5-40.4%). Stoma revision was done more often in the SP (n = 11) than in the NP (n = 2). Total costs in the SP did not differ significantly from the NP.

CONCLUSION

The NP did not reduce the number of stoma-related complications but did lead to improved quality of care and life, against similar costs. Based on these results the NP, including perioperative home visits by an enterostomal therapist, can be recommended.

The safety and feasibility of early discharge following ileostomy reversal: a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare 30-day clinical outcomes following routine ileostomy reversal between patients that underwent early discharge (<24 h) and standard discharge (postoperative day [POD] 2 or 3).

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted between 2005 and 2014 using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data set. All patients undergoing ileostomy reversal who were discharged on POD 0 or 1 (early discharge group [EDG]) versus POD 2 or 3 (standard discharge group [SDG]) were identified. The primary outcome was the 30-day adverse event rate. The secondary outcome was the 30-day readmission rate. A multivariate analysis was performed to determine the adjusted effect of early discharge as well as the predictors of adverse events and readmissions.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 355 and 5805 patients in the EDG and SDG, respectively. There were 19 (5.4%) 30-day adverse events in the EDG and 341 (5.8%) in the SDG. The EDG had 17 (4.8%) 30-day readmissions and the SDG had 294 (5.1%). The adjusted odds ratio for 30-day adverse events in the EDG was 0.95 (P = 0.83), and for 30-day readmissions, it was 1.01 (P = 0.96). Higher BMI, longer operative time, ASA ≥3, chronic steroid use along with a history of bleeding disorder were significant predictors for adverse events and readmissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Select patients discharged within 24 h of ileostomy reversal did not have a significantly higher rate of adverse events or readmissions compared to patients discharged on POD 2 or 3 following uncomplicated surgery. Predictors of adverse events and readmissions can guide the selection of patients suitable for early discharge.

Using Modified Frailty Index to Predict Safe Discharge Within 48 Hours of Ileostomy Closure

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery pathways allow for safe discharge and optimal outcomes within 48 hours after ileostomy closure. Unfortunately, some patients undergoing ileostomy closure have prolonged hospital stays. We have shown previously that the Modified Frailty Index can help predict patients who will fail early discharge after laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to use the Modified Frailty Index to identify patients who were safe for early discharge after ileostomy closure.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent ileostomy closure (2006-2015) were stratified into early (≤48 hours) and late discharge groups.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The Modified Frailty Index, morbidity, and readmission rates were measured.

RESULTS

A total of 272 patients undergoing ileostomy closure were evaluated. Overall length of stay was 3.64 days (±3.23 days), with 114 patients (42%) discharged within 48 hours. Sex, age, and ASA scores were similar between early and later discharge groups (p > 0.2). Univariate logistic regression demonstrated that a Modified Frailty Index score of 0 was associated with early discharge (p = 0.03), whereas a Modified Frailty Index score ≤1 and ≤2 were not. There was no significant association between the Modified Frailty Index and complication or readmission rates. Postoperative complications occurred in 39 patients (14.3%), and 1 patient died secondary to an anastomotic leak. Fifteen patients (5.5%) were readmitted within 30 days. Readmission rate within 30 days was 3.2%, with a Modified Frailty Index score of 0, 6.1% for a Modified Frailty Index score of <1, and 5.9% for a Modified Frailty Index score of <2, for which there was not an association based on univariate logistic regression (Modified Frailty Index = 0, p = 0.13; <1, p = 0.55; <2, p = 0.53).

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by nature of being a retrospective review.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing ileostomy closure with a Modified Frailty Index score of 0 are associated with higher rates of discharge within 48 hours of ileostomy closure surgery than those with a higher Modified Frailty Index, without higher readmission rates. This information can be helpful to better manage patient and resource use expectations for the duration of inpatient recovery.

Development and Validation of a Risk Calculator for Renal Complications after Colorectal Surgery Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files

Postoperative acute renal failure is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in colon and rectal surgery. Our objective was to identify preoperative risk factors that predispose patients to postoperative renal failure and renal insufficiency, and subsequently develop a risk calculator. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Participant Use Files database, all patients who underwent colorectal surgery in 2009 were selected (n = 21,720). We identified renal complications during the 30-day period after surgery. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, a predictive model was developed. The overall incidence of renal complications among colorectal surgery patients was 1.6 per cent. Significant predictors include male gender (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.8), dependent functional status (OR: 1.5), preoperative dyspnea (OR: 1.5), hypertension (OR: 1.6), preoperative acute renal failure (OR: 2.0), American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3 (OR: 2.2), preoperative creatinine >1.2 mg/dL (OR: 2.8), albumin <3.5 g/dL (OR: 1.8), and emergency operation (OR: 1.5). This final model has an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.79 and was validated with similar excellent discrimination (area under the curve: 0.76). Using this model, a risk calculator was developed with excellent predictive ability for postoperative renal complications in colorectal patients and can be used to aid clinical decision-making, patient counseling, and further research on measures to improve patient care.

Laparoscopic Versus Open Loop Ileostomy Reversal: Is there an Advantage to a Minimally Invasive Approach?

BACKGROUND

Ileostomy reversals are commonly performed procedures after colon and rectal operations. Laparoscopic ileostomy reversal (LIR) with lysis of adhesions has potential benefits over conventional open surgery. The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of laparoscopic and open ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

133 consecutive patients undergoing ileostomy reversal at our institution between June 2009 and August 2013 were analyzed using a retrospective database. The group comprised 53 laparoscopic cases and 80 open cases, performed by four surgeons at a single center. The data were analyzed for patient demographics, operative characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

The two groups had comparable mean age, gender distribution, ASA scores, and BMI. The laparoscopic group had a significantly longer duration of surgery compared to the open reversal group (109 versus 93 min, p < 0.05). However, this group underwent more lysis of adhesions (60.4 % versus 26.3 %, p < 0.01) as well as concurrent stoma site mesh reinforcement (32.1 % versus 6.3 %, p < 0.01). In the laparoscopy group, 20.7 % of patients underwent intra-corporeal ileo-ileal anastomosis. There were no significant differences between the laparoscopic and open groups with regard to estimated blood loss (31 versus 40 ml, respectively) or mean length of stay (5.3 vs. 5.7 days, respectively). The rates of overall 30-day morbidity (16.9 % for laparoscopic vs. 21.3 % for open) as well as rates of specific complications were equivalent between groups. 30-day mortalities were not noted in either group.

CONCLUSION

LIR is safe and effective with low perioperative morbidity and mortality. The use of laparoscopy as an option in terms of concomitant hernia repair and lysis of adhesions may be considered in selected patients.

Ileostomy closure in an enhanced recovery setting

AIM

Hospital stays of 5 days or more are not uncommon following ileostomy closure, yet within an enhanced recovery programme (ERP) it is possible for patients to be discharged on the first postoperative day following anterior resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the introduction of an ERP for ileostomy closure reduced hospital stay without affecting morbidity or readmission rates.

METHOD

Consecutive patients undergoing elective ileostomy closure from October 2000 to March 2013 were included in this study. The data were collected prospectively into a database. Enhanced recovery was introduced for all elective ileostomy closures in June 2010. Demographic data, length of stay (LOS), readmission, morbidity and mortality were compared between the two groups using the Mann-Whitney U-test and Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-five patients underwent elective ileostomy closure during the study period (37 ERP and 108 pre-ERP). There were no differences between the two groups with respect to demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, prior radiotherapy or chemotherapy, operative time, body mass index, antibiotic use or closure method. Readmission rates (5% vs 6.5%, P = 1.0), morbidity (8% vs 10%, P = 1.0) and mortality (0% vs 0%) were not significantly different. Median (2 vs 4 days, P < 0.0001) and mean (3.4 vs 5.6 days, P = 0.033) LOS were significantly shorter in the ERP group compared with the pre-ERP group.

CONCLUSION

An ERP for closure of ileostomy significantly reduces LOS without adverse effects for patients.

Meta-analysis of handsewn versus stapled reversal of loop ileostomy

BACKGROUND

The morbidity associated with closure of loop ileostomy (LI) may be attributed to the various surgical techniques employed for the closure. The purpose of this review was to review the hand-sutured (HS) versus the stapled anastomosis (SA) techniques, used in the reversal of LI.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, PubMed, CINHAL, Cochrane library and Web of Knowledge databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control trials (CCTs), evaluating HS and SA in reversal of LI. Data extraction with risk of bias assessment was followed by subgroup and pooled data meta-analysis where applicable per outcome.

RESULTS

Four RCTs (HS: 321, SA: 328) and 10 CCTs (HS: 2808, SA: 1044) were identified, with a total of 4508 patients. Regardless of subgroup analysis, no difference was seen between the two techniques with regard to anastomotic leaks (P = 0.24, odds ratio (OR): 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.81-2.29) or re-operation. The stapled group showed a significantly lower rate of conservatively managed small bowel obstruction (SBO)/ ileus at 30 days (P < 0.001, OR: 2.27, 95% CI: 1.59-2.96) (P < 0.001) and SBO during combined short- and long-term follow-up (P < 0.001). The SA also showed significant shorter operative time (P = 0.02; WMD 11.52 min), time to first bowel opening (P < 0.001; WMD 0.52 days) and length of hospital stay (P = 0.03; WMD 0.70 days).

CONCLUSION

The stapled technique offers an advantage in terms of lower post-operative subacute SBO rates, a faster operative technique and shorter hospitalization times. These perceived benefits make it potentially superior to HS for the reversal of LI.

Outcomes after implementation of a multimodal standard care pathway for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to assess which aspects of an enhanced recovery programme are associated with better outcomes following laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A database of laparoscopic colorectal procedures performed in 2011 was reviewed. Elements of the enhanced recovery programme and compliance were evaluated for short-term (30-day) outcomes. Individual elements included gabapentin, celecoxib, intrathecal analgesia, diet, postoperative fluids, and paracetamol/non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug pain management.

RESULTS

Five hundred and forty-one consecutive procedures were included. Compliance with the enhanced recovery programme elements ranged from 82.4 to 99.3 per cent. Median length of hospital stay was 3 (i.q.r. 2-5) days, with 25.9 per cent of patients discharged within 48 h. Patients without complications had a median length of stay of 3 (i.q.r. 2-4) days if compliant and 3 (3-5) days if not (P < 0.001). Low oral opiate intake (oral morphine equivalent of less than 30 mg) (odds ratio (OR) 1.97, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.29 to 3.03; P = 0.002), full compliance (OR 2.36, 1.42 to 3.90; P < 0.001) and high surgeon volume (more than 100 cases per year) (OR 1.50, 1.19 to 1.89; P < 0.001) were associated with discharge within 48 h. Compliance with the elements of oral intake and fluid management in the first 48 h was associated with a reduced rate of complications (8.1 versus 19.6 per cent; P = 0.001). Median oral opiate intake was 37.5 (i.q.r. 0-105) mg in 48 h, with 26.2 per cent of patients receiving no opiates.

CONCLUSION

Compliance with an enhanced recovery pathway was associated with less opiate use, fewer complications and a shorter hospital stay.

Identifying causes for high readmission rates after stoma reversal

BACKGROUND

Unplanned readmissions after colorectal surgery impact patient and financial outcomes. Our goal was to identify factors related to readmission in ostomy reversal patients.

METHODS

Review of a prospective department database was performed from 2006 to 2012 to identify patients who underwent an ostomy reversal. Patients were stratified into nonreadmitted and readmitted within 30 days of ostomy reversal. The main outcome measures were predictors of readmission and characteristics of patients readmitted and not readmitted.

RESULTS

A total of 351 ostomy reversals (86 % ileostomy and 14 % colostomy) were analyzed; 44 patients were readmitted (12.5 %). Readmitted and nonreadmitted patients were similar in age, body mass index, gender, comorbidities, indications for the index operation, and time to ostomy reversal. Readmitted patients had longer operative times (p = 0.002) and length of stay (p = 0.001), more intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.003), intraoperative complications (p = 0.005), ICU requirements (p < 0.0001), need for temporary nursing at discharge (p < 0.001), and higher total hospital costs than nonreadmitted patients (p = 0.0162). Longer operative time [odds ratio (OR) 1.006, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.001-1.012], intraoperative complications (OR 7.334, 95 % CI 1.23-43.761), ICU stay (OR 1.291, 95 % CI 1.18-1.893), delayed discharge (OR 1.085, 95 % CI 1.003-1.173), and discharge to skilled nursing facility (OR 6.936, 95 % CI 1.531-31.332) were independent predictors of readmission. Ostomy type had no independent effect on readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in perioperative and outcomes variables exist between readmitted and nonreadmitted patients after ostomy reversal. Longer operative times, intraoperative complications, intensive care unit care, longer length of stay, and skilled nursing at discharge were independently predictive of readmission. These findings can be used to identify high-risk patients prospectively, potentially improving clinical outcomes and healthcare utilization.

Randomized clinical trial of the benefit of laparoscopy with closure of loop ileostomy

Background

The aim was to compare reversal and laparoscopy with standard reversal of loop ileostomy in terms of hospital stay and morbidity in a randomized study.

Methods

Patients having reversal of a loop ileostomy were randomized to either standard reversal of ileostomy or reversal and laparoscopy. Strict discharge criteria were applied: toleration of two meals without nausea and vomiting, passing a bowel motion, and attaining adequate pain control with oral analgesia. Morbidity and cost were also compared between the two groups.

Results

A total of 74 patients (reversal and laparoscopy 40, standard reversal 34) with a median age of 61 years underwent loop ileostomy reversal; there were 45 men (61 per cent). Ileostomy was most commonly carried out after laparoscopic low anterior resection (36 patients). Median length of stay, based on discharge criteria, was significantly shorter in the reversal and laparoscopy group than in the standard group: 4 (interquartile range 3–4) versus 5 (4–6) days (P = 0·003). The overall morbidity rate was also lower in patients who had ileostomy reversal and laparoscopy: 10 versus 32 per cent (P = 0·023). The median cost per patient was lower in the reversal and laparoscopy group: €3450 (interquartile range 2766–3450) versus €4527 (3843–7263) (P = 0·015). There was no statistically significant difference in American Society of Anesthesiologists fitness grade or time to reversal between the two groups.

Conclusion

Reversal of loop ileostomy with laparoscopy was associated with a shorter hospital stay, lower morbidity and reduced cost compared with the standard technique. Registration number: ISRCTN46101203 (http://www.controlled-trials.com).

Liposome bupivacaine (EXPAREL®) for extended pain relief in patients undergoing ileostomy reversal at a single institution with a fast-track discharge protocol: an IMPROVE Phase IV health economics trial

Background

Postoperative opioid use following ileostomy reversal procedures contributes to postoperative ileus. We assessed the impact of a liposome bupivacaine-based, opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia regimen versus a standard opioid-based analgesia regimen on postsurgical opioid use. We also assessed health economic outcomes in patients undergoing ileostomy reversal at our institution, which employs an enhanced recovery discharge protocol.

Methods

In this single-center, open-label study, patients undergoing ileostomy reversal received postsurgical pain therapy via multimodal analgesia that included a single intraoperative administration of liposome bupivacaine or opioid-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine or hydromorphone. Rescue analgesia (intravenous [IV] opioids and/or oral opioid + acetaminophen) was available to all patients. Primary efficacy measures included postsurgical opioid use, hospital length of stay (LOS), and hospitalization costs. Secondary measures included: time to first rescue opioid use; patient satisfaction with analgesia; additional medical intervention; and opioid-related adverse events.

Results

Forty-three patients were enrolled and met eligibility criteria (IV opioid PCA group = 20; liposome bupivacaine-based multimodal analgesia group = 23). Postsurgical opioid use was significantly less in the multimodal analgesia group compared with the IV opioid PCA group (mean [standard deviation]: 38 mg [46 mg] versus 68 mg [47 mg]; P = 0.004). Postsurgical LOS between-group differences (median: 3.0 days versus 3.8 days) and geometric mean hospitalization costs (US $6,611 versus US$6,790) favored the multimodal analgesic group but did not achieve statistical significance. Median time to first opioid use was 1.1 hours versus 0.7 hours in the multimodal analgesia and IV opioid PCA groups, respectively; P = 0.035. Two patients in the multimodal analgesia group and one in the IV opioid PCA group experienced opioid-related adverse events.

Conclusion

A liposome bupivacaine-based multimodal analgesic regimen reduced postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing ileostomy reversal under a fast-track discharge protocol. A reduction of 21% in LOS (0.8 days) was noted which, although not statistically significant, may be considered clinically meaningful given the already aggressive fast-track discharge program.

An extended paIn relief trial utilizing the infiltration of a long-acting Multivesicular liPosome foRmulation Of bupiVacaine, EXPAREL (IMPROVE): a Phase IV health economic trial in adult patients undergoing ileostomy reversal

BACKGROUND

Opioid analgesics are effective for postsurgical pain but are associated with opioid-related adverse events, creating a significant clinical and economic burden. Gastrointestinal surgery patients are at high risk for opioid-related adverse events. We conducted a study to assess the impact of an opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia regimen with liposome bupivacaine, compared with the standard of care (intravenous [IV] opioid-based, patient-controlled analgesia [PCA]) on postsurgical opioid use and health economic outcomes in patients undergoing ileostomy reversal.

METHODS

In this open-label, multicenter study, sequential cohorts of patients undergoing ileostomy reversal received IV opioid PCA (first cohort); or multimodal analgesia including a single intraoperative administration of liposome bupivacaine (second cohort). Rescue analgesia was available to all patients. Primary outcome measures were postsurgical opioid use, hospital length of stay, and hospitalization costs. Incidence of opioid-related adverse events was also assessed.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients were enrolled, underwent the planned surgery, and did not meet any intraoperative exclusion criteria; 16 received liposome bupivacaine-based multimodal analgesia and eleven received the standard IV opioid PCA regimen. The multimodal regimen was associated with significant reductions in opioid use compared with the IV opioid PCA regimen (mean, 20 mg versus 112 mg; median, 6 mg versus 48 mg, respectively; P < 0.01), postsurgical length of stay (median, 3.0 days versus 5.1 days, respectively; P < 0.001), and hospitalization costs (geometric mean, $6482 versus $9282, respectively; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

A liposome bupivacaine-based multimodal analgesic regimen resulted in statistically significant and clinically meaningful reductions in opioid consumption, shorter length of stay, and lower inpatient costs than an IV opioid-based analgesic regimen.

Integrating hospital administrative data to improve health care efficiency and outcomes: "the socrates story"

Evaluation of health care outcomes has become increasingly important as we strive to improve quality and efficiency while controlling cost. Many groups feel that analysis of large datasets will be useful in optimizing resource utilization; however, the ideal blend of clinical and administrative data points has not been developed. Hospitals and health care systems have several tools to measure cost and resource utilization, but the data are often housed in disparate systems that are not integrated and do not permit multisystem analysis. Systems Outcomes and Clinical Resources AdministraTive Efficiency Software (SOCRATES) is a novel data merging, warehousing, analysis, and reporting technology, which brings together disparate hospital administrative systems generating automated or customizable risk-adjusted reports. Used in combination with standardized enhanced care pathways, SOCRATES offers a mechanism to improve the quality and efficiency of care, with the ability to measure real-time changes in outcomes.

Ileostomy pathway virtually eliminates readmissions for dehydration in new ostomates

BACKGROUND

New ileostomates face significant physical and psychological adaptations. Despite advanced resources, such as wound, ostomy, and continence nurses, we observed a high readmission rate for dehydration among patients with new ileostomies.

OBJECTIVE

Our goal was to create a pathway to reduce readmission and facilitate patient education and well-being.

DESIGN

The 'Ileostomy Pathway' was established by a collaborative group at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center. A standardized set of patient education tools was developed to be used throughout the perioperative process. Patient's education started with the preoperative visit. All patients were directly engaged in ostomy management and trained in a stepwise progression. Patients were discharged from the hospital with flow sheets, supplies for recording intake/output, and visiting nurse services. Prospectively collected data from the first 7 months was compared with a retrospective database of the previous 4 years.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a tertiary academic center.

PATIENTS

Patients with a new permanent or temporary ileostomy were included.

INTERVENTIONS

A new ileostomy pathway was created.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measured was readmission rates.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-one patients were assigned to prepathway implementation and 42 were assigned to postpathway implementation. One hundred three of 203 (50.7%) patients were men, and 58 of 203 (28.6%) patients had permanent ostomies. Overall readmission rate was 35.4% and 21.4% for the prepathway and postpathway groups. The readmission rate for dehydration was 15.5% (25/161) for prepathway patients, but dropped to 0% in the study group. The average length of stay after creation of the new ostomy was 7.5 days and 6.6 days for prepathway and postpathway groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by its small sample size and the lack of randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

A simple, educational program for new ileostomy patients that includes preoperative teaching, standardized teaching materials, in-hospital engagement, observed management, and postdischarge tracking of intake and output is very effective in decreasing hospital readmission. The average length of stay remained stable, despite the addition of this teaching program to our perioperative/inpatient care.

Alvimopan addition to a standard perioperative recovery pathway

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Alvimopan, a peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, decreased time to gastrointestinal recovery and hospital length of stay in open bowel resection patients in Phase 3 trials. However, the benefit in laparoscopic colectomy patients remains unclear.

METHODS

A retrospective case series review was performed to study addition of alvimopan to a well-established standard perioperative recovery pathway for elective laparoscopic colectomy. The main outcome measures were length of stay and incidence of charted postoperative ileus. Wilcoxon and chi-square tests were used to calculate P values for length of stay and postoperative ileus endpoints, respectively.

RESULTS

Demographic/baseline characteristics from the 101 alvimopan and 64 pre-alvimopan control patients were generally comparable. Mean length of stay in the alvimopan group was 1.55 days shorter (alvimopan, 2.81±0.95 days; control, 4.36±2.4 days; P<.0001). The proportion of patients with postoperative ileus was lower in the alvimopan group (alvimopan, 2%; control, 20%; P<.0001).

CONCLUSION

In this case series, addition of alvimopan to a standard perioperative recovery pathway decreased length of stay and incidence of postoperative ileus for elective uncomplicated laparoscopic colectomy. The improvement in the mean length of stay for patients who receive alvimopan is a step forward in achieving a fasttrack surgery model for elective laparoscopic colectomies.

Closure of loop ileostomy: potentially a daycase procedure?

BACKGROUND

Four thousand four hundred and twenty-seven ileostomy closures were performed in the UK in 2008-2009, (35,432 bed days). None were recorded as being performed as a daycase procedure. Our aim is to evaluate the morbidity and mortality associated with this procedure and to investigate whether daycase surgery is feasible.

METHOD

Patients having closure of loop ileostomy were identified retrospectively from May 2005 to July 2010. The primary surgery, method of ileostomy closure, length of hospital stay and early (≤30 days) or late (>30 days) complications were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were evaluated. The median age was 63 (17-83) years and 64% were male patients. The primary surgery was predominantly anterior resection (74%). Median time from initial surgery to reversal was 37 (1-117) weeks. The median length of hospital stay was 4 (1-39) days. Applying a 23-h discharge protocol to our results excluded 18 patients categorised as ASA3. Ninety-six patients (80%) met the discharge criteria for a potential 23-h hospital stay. The expected readmission rate within 30 days of surgery was 12% (n = 14). 85 patients (71%) did not suffer an early complication. There were 35 early complications (30%), 10 general and 25 specific to the procedure, but serious only in 5%. There were no deaths in the eligible patients.

CONCLUSION

Closure of loop ileostomy in our series is safe, with a low serious morbidity rate. It may be feasible to perform reversal of ileostomy as a daycase/23-h stay. We intend to implement a 23-h stay for reversal of ileostomy.

Identifying risk factors for renal failure and myocardial infarction following colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The development of acute renal failure and myocardial infarction (MI) following colectomy prolongs recovery and is associated with worse outcomes. The purpose of this study is to identify perioperative factors that predispose patients to an adverse cardiac or renal complication.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of colectomies from 2001 to 2009. Patients were evaluated based upon the electronic inpatient record and followed to determine the incidence of acute renal failure (creatinine elevation over 50% of baseline) and myocardial injury.

RESULTS

A total of 339 inpatient records were reviewed, of which 134 were female (40%) and 205 male (60%). The mean age was 61.96 ± 16.2 years with 39.5% right hemicolectomies, 22.7% sigmoidectomy, 13.9% Left hemicolectomy, 11.5% total abdominal colectomy, and 6.2% for ileocectomy and transverse colectomy. Within the cohort, 13.9% had baseline renal insufficiency (Cr > 1.4), 7.1% sustained anastomotic leak, 23.9% required postoperative intubation, 15% sustained postoperative sepsis, 11.2% postoperative MI, and 5% clinically significant acidosis. Excluding patients with an anastomotic leak, postoperative intubation, and sepsis, we found that the need for blood product transfusion was associated with postoperative acute renal failure (OR= 7.15 [2.4-20.7]). Preoperative creatinine > 1.5, limited functional capacity, and preoperative systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg were all associated with increased MI rates (OR= 15.7 [3.6-66.8], 9.5 [2.1-42.2], 12.0 [5.523-26.072], and 40.6 [1.7-968], respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that several potentially modifiable preoperative and intraoperative factors exist that predispose patients to postoperative cardiac and renal dysfunction in the absence of major surgical complications.

Enhanced recovery pathways optimize health outcomes and resource utilization: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Health care systems provide care to increasingly complex and elderly patients. Colorectal surgery is a prime example, with high volumes of major procedures, significant morbidity, prolonged hospital stays, and unplanned readmissions. This situation is exacerbated by an exponential rise in costs that threatens the stability of health care systems. Enhanced recovery pathways (ERP) have been proposed as a means to reduce morbidity and improve effectiveness of care. We have reviewed the evidence supporting the implementation of ERP in clinical practice.

METHODS

Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched for randomized, controlled trials comparing ERP with traditional care in colorectal surgery. Systematic reviews and papers on ERP based on data published in major surgical and anesthesiology journals were critically reviewed by international contributors, experienced in the development and implementation of ERP.

RESULTS

A random-effect Bayesian meta-analysis was performed, including 6 randomized, controlled trials totalizing 452 patients. For patients adhering to ERP, length of stay decreased by 2.5 days (95% credible interval [CrI] -3.92 to -1.11), whereas 30-day morbidity was halved (relative risk, 0.52; 95% CrI, 0.36-0.73) and readmission was not increased (relative risk, 0.59; 95% CrI, 0.14-1.43) when compared with patients undergoing traditional care.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to ERP achieves a reproducible improvement in the quality of care by enabling standardization of health care processes. Thus, while accelerating recovery and safely reducing hospital stay, ERPs optimize utilization of health care resources. ERPs can and should be routinely used in care after colorectal and other major gastrointestinal procedures.

Association of surgical care practices with length of stay and use of clinical protocols after elective bowel resection: results of a national survey

BACKGROUND

Although management techniques have been proposed to accelerate gastrointestinal recovery after elective bowel resection (BR), most data are derived from single-institution experience. This study assessed the current state of perioperative care for elective BRs and the effect of pathway components on length of stay.

METHODS

A web-based survey was conducted among surgeons regarding their last elective BR.

RESULTS

Among 207 general and 200 colorectal surgeons, 30% practice in hospitals with a perioperative surgical care pathway intended to accelerate gastrointestinal recovery. Pathway components included early ambulation, early diet progression, early nasogastric tube removal/avoidance, and opioid-sparing pain control. Care practices associated with decreased length of stay included laparoscopic technique, early mobilization, early liquids, and antiemetic use to prevent symptoms associated with prolonged postoperative ileus.

CONCLUSIONS

Few hospitals have pathways but most surgeons likely would implement nationally endorsed guidelines. These data, along with other studies, may lead to well-accepted BR care pathways.