Risk taking propensity: Nurse, surgeon and patient preferences for diverting ileostomy

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum (PICARR): a decision-making exploring international survey

In our previous survey of experts, surgeon's decision-making process (DMP) about protective ileostomy (PI) creation after anterior resection was investigated. Based on our previous data, a multiple choice questionnaire has been developed. The aim is to perform a quantitative analysis of the results obtained from an international survey and to describe the clinical practice worldwide. Ten questions were related to participants' demographics and, 20 questions (of which 17 Likert scale questions) investigated the DMP regarding PI creation. To evaluate the tendency of the answers in the Likert-type questions, the mean of the answers obtained was compared with the mean point of the Likert scale. The survey was completed by 1019 physicians. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge ≤ 10 cm were each considered alone sufficient to justify creation of a PI, with statistically significant differences in comparison to the mean point of the scales in (p =  < 0.0001 in both cases). Total Mesorectal Excision alone was not considered a factor sufficient to create a PI (p = 0.416). Most of the participants agree to define their approach to create a PI "tailored" to patients' risk factors (p =  < 0.0001) and "influenced by my experience" in case of patients with low/moderate risk of anastomotic leakage (p =  < 0.0001). This study provides useful insights on the worldwide clinical practice regarding creation of PI following anterior resection. Given the lack of standardization and evidence-based guidelines, this analysis may be helpful to assist surgeons' practice.

Drain fluid iodine as a biomarker of anastomotic leak after low anterior resection in patients undergoing Gastrografin rectal tube flushes and omission of a diverting ileostomy: The GUSH study

AIM

Anastomotic leak (AL) is the anathema of colorectal surgery and its occurrence constitutes a serious risk to patients and places a substantial burden on the health system. The analysis of extravasated intraluminal substances in drain fluid has shown promise for the early detection of AL. The aim of this study is to assess the measurement of drain fluid iodine as a biomarker of AL.

METHOD

This prospective, observational, 2b exploration cohort study measured the iodine in drain fluid of patients undergoing a low colorectal anastomosis and without a diverting ileostomy (DI) when the rectal tube was flushed with Gastrografin®. Iodine was measured by dual-energy computed tomography (DECT) and inductively coupled plasma mass spectroscopy (ICPMS).

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients underwent a rectal resection and low colorectal anastomosis. Five patients experienced an AL. Four had grade C AL and returned to the operating theatre for peritoneal lavage and DI. The fifth was diagnosed at 30 days postoperatively and underwent image-guided drainage (grade B). The mean drain fluid iodine was significantly elevated in patients who experienced an AL compared with those who did not, as measured by DECT and ICPMS. The mean iodine value was 6.05 mg/mL vs. 0.088 mg/mL (p < 0.0001) for DECT and 41 437 μmol/L vs. 3.81 μmol/L (p < 0.0001) for ICPMS.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that drain iodine can be used as a sensitive indicator of early AL in patients undergoing a rectal resection with an extraperitoneal colorectal anastomosis and omission of a DI and when the rectal tube is flushed with Gastrografin following surgery.

Feasibility of triple assessment of the anastomosis using an anastomotic checklist

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer is the third most common cancer and the second highest cause of cancer mortality in Australia. Despite advances in colorectal surgery, anastomotic leak still occurs in low-risk patients and is a substantial cause of morbidity and mortality. Many operative strategies are used to assess anastomotic integrity such as an air leak test or intraoperative flexible sigmoidoscopy, however an objective anastomotic checklist is yet to be developed and studied. This study aims to develop a photodocumentary anastomotic specific checklist and determine its feasibility for implementation.

METHODS

Patients undergoing left sided colorectal resections with primary anastomosis without a de-functioning ileostomy were prospectively included between May 2021 and December 2022. A photographic checklist assessing anastomotic perfusion, integrity via either air test or endoscopic image, evidence of complete operative doughnut specimens and the assessment of tension was implemented. The feasibility of an anastomotic checklist was externally validated by four independent colorectal surgeons from Australia, New Zealand and United States of America.

RESULTS

The anastomotic checklist was completed in 44 patients. Mean age was 62 years, with 43% male and mean BMI 28. Operations included high anterior resection (45%), low anterior resection (18%), ultra-low anterior resection (20%), reversal of Hartmann's (11%). Median length of stay was 4 days. Complications post operatively were documented in six patients with anastomotic leak in 2% and wound infection in 6.8%. Intraclass correlation coefficients were poor amongst all reviewers with air leak and tension having no inter-reviewer correlation.

CONCLUSION

The introduction of an anastomotic checklist was a feasible tool to systematically assess and document anastomotic integrity. Unfortunately, with the small sample size there was significant discrepancy in inter-observer variability, and this led to poor correlation regarding which patients were typically high risk requiring a temporary ileostomy. Larger studies on the implementation of an anastomotic checklist will be needed to evaluate if it is an inherently feasible approach and if there is an effect on anastomotic leak.

Surgeon perceptions of personality as an influencing factor on anastomotic decision-making: A qualitative analysis

AIM

Surgeon personality is a factor influencing rectal anastomotic decision-making. However, it is unclear how or why this may be the case, or what aspects of personality are involved. The aim of this study was to investigate the views of colorectal surgeons on how their individual personality may influence variation in anastomotic decision-making.

METHOD

Purposive sampling was used to invite certified UK-based colorectal surgeons to participate, with individual interviews used for data collection. Participants were recruited until ongoing data review indicated no new codes were generated (i.e. data sufficiency). Data were analysed thematically following Braun and Clarke's six-step framework.

RESULTS

Seventeen colorectal surgeons (eight female, nine male) participated. Two key themes relating to personality and decision-making were identified: (1) surgeon development and training and (2) patient-surgeon interactions, each with relevant subthemes. Surgeons described how their personality may influence patients' postoperative outcomes (e.g. decision-making, team working and communication) and potential mechanisms for how their personality may influence operative risk-taking. Following anastomotic leakage, surgeons described a disproportionate sense of guilt and responsibility. There appears to be a significant transition in responsibility from trainee to newly appointed consultant, which may be part of the 'hidden curriculum' of surgical training.

CONCLUSION

Colorectal surgeons have described their perceptions of how personality traits may impact variation in decision-making and patient outcomes for the first time. Early career surgeons felt ill-prepared for the level of guilt experienced when managing complications. Surgeons appear open to personality assessment if this was through an educational lens, with the aim of improving decision-making following complications and overall performance.

Protective ileostomy creation after anterior resection of the rectum: Shared decision-making or still subjective?

AIM

The choice of whether to perform protective ileostomy (PI) after anterior resection (AR) is mainly guided by risk factors (RFs) responsible for the development of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, clear guidelines about PI creation are still lacking in the literature and this is often decided according to the surgeon's preferences, experiences or feelings. This qualitative study aims to investigate, by an open-ended question survey, the individual surgeon's decision-making process regarding PI creation after elective AR.

METHOD

Fifty four colorectal surgeons took part in an electronic survey to answer the questions and describe what usually led their decision to perform PI. A content analysis was used to code the answers. To classify answers, five dichotomous categories (In favour/Against PI, Listed/Unlisted RFs, Typical/Atypical, Emotions/Non-emotions, Personal experience/No personal experience) have been developed.

RESULTS

Overall, 76% of surgeons were in favour of PI creation and 88% considered listed RFs in the question of whether to perform PI. Atypical answers were reported in 10% of cases. Emotions and personal experience influenced surgeons' decision-making process in 22% and 49% of cases, respectively. The most frequently considered RFs were the distance of the anastomosis from the anal verge (96%), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (88%), a positive intraoperative leak test (65%), blood loss (37%) and immunosuppression therapy (35%).

CONCLUSION

The indications to perform PI following rectal cancer surgery lack standardization and evidence-based guidelines are required to inform practice. Until then, expert opinion can be helpful to assist the decision-making process in patients who have undergone AR for adenocarcinoma.