Heidi K. Chua

Segmental vs. Extended Colectomy : Measurable Differences in Morbidity, Function, and Quality of Life

PurposeThe colon coordinates fecal elimination while reabsorbing excess fluid. Extended colonic resection removes synchronous and prevents metachronous disease but may adversely alter bowel function and health-related quality of life to a greater degree than segmental resection. This study examined the short-term morbidity and long-term function and quality of life after colon resections of different extents.MethodsPatients undergoing extended resections (n = 201, subtotal colectomy with ileosigmoid or total abdominal colectomy with ileorectal anastomosis) and segmental colonic resections (n = 321) during 1991 to 2003 were reviewed for perioperative outcomes and surveyed for bowel function and quality of life using an institutional questionnaire and a validated quality of life instrument (response rate: 70 percent).ResultsThe most common indication for extended resections was multiple polyps, and for segmental resections, single malignancy. The complication-free rate was 75.4 percent after segmental resections, 42.8 percent after ileosigmoid anastomosis, and 60 percent after ileorectal anastomosis. Median daily stool frequency was two after segmental resections, four after ileosigmoid anastomosis, and five after ileorectal anastomosis, despite considerable dietary restrictions (55.6 percent) and medication use (19.6 percent daily) after ileorectal anastomosis. Significant proportions of patients felt restricted from preoperative social activity (31.5 percent), housework (20.4 percent), recreation (31.5 percent), and travel (42.6 percent) after ileorectal anastomosis. The overall quality of life after segmental resection, ileosigmoid anastomosis, and ileorectal anastomosis was 98.5, 94.9, and 91.2, respectively.ConclusionsMeasurable compromises in long-term bowel function and quality of life were observed after extended vs. segmental resections. The relative differences in patient-related outcomes should be deliberated against the clinical benefits of extended resection for the individual patient.

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

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

Quality of Life After Ileal Pouch-Anal Anastomosis and Ileorectal Anastomosis in Patients With Familial Adenomatous Polyposis

PURPOSEDifferences in conventional outcomes such as functional results and the rate of complications have caused a controversy about whether the ileal pouch anal anastomosis or the ileorectal anastomosis is the preferred surgical treatment for patients with familial adenomatous polyposis. We therefore sought to ascertain not only the surgical results but also the perceptions of patients about their outcomes.METHODSBetween 1981 and 1998, 152 patients at our institution had an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis and 32 patients had an ileorectal anastomosis for familial adenomatous polyposis. Of these 184 patients, 173 were sent a study-specific quality-of-life questionnaire and the Short Form 36 health survey to determine their health-related quality of life.RESULTSNinety-four ileal pouch patients and 21 ileorectal patients returned the surveys. No difference was found in early postoperative complications, 5-year probability for complications, or functional results after either procedure. On the Short Form 36 health survey, the ileorectal patients had a lower mental health summary score compared with that of the ileal pouch patients but a similar physical health summary score. The study-specific questionnaire found both groups to have a comparable quality of life.CONCLUSIONBecause ileal pouch-anal anastomosis has the advantage of removing as much at-risk tissue as possible with similar functional results and better mental health, it may be considered the preferred operation for most patients with familial adenomatous polyposis.

Impact of Pelvic Radiotherapy on Morbidity and Durability of Sphincter Preservation After Coloanal Anastomosis for Rectal Cancers

PurposeThis study was designed to assess the impact of pelvic radiotherapy on the incidence of complications and colostomy-free survival of patients after a coloanal anastomosis for rectal cancer.MethodsA total of 192 patients underwent a coloanal anastomosis between 1982 and 2001: 87 patients did not receive pelvic radiotherapy; 105 patients received pelvic radiotherapy (39 preoperative and 66 postoperative). Early and late complications requiring surgical intervention and the colostomy-free survival rate were assessed by retrospective review of patient records.ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 62 months, 151 patients were alive. The most frequent complication was development of an anastomotic stricture (5-year rate of a stricture, 16 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 10–21). Patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy had a higher rate of complications other than anastomotic strictures, including fecal incontinence, fistulas, abscesses, and bowel obstructions compared with patients not receiving pelvic radiotherapy (5-year rate: 20 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 10–29) vs. 5 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 0–10); P = 0.001). Patients receiving pelvic radiotherapy had a lower colostomy-free survival than did patients not receiving pelvic radiotherapy (5-year colostomy-free rate: 72 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 62–84) vs. 92 percent (95 percent confidence interval, 86–98); P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the colostomy-free survival of patients receiving preoperative and postoperative pelvic radiotherapy.ConclusionsAfter coloanal anastomosis, a significant number of patients will have complications requiring surgical intervention, and some will require a permanent colostomy. Pelvic radiotherapy, whether it is administered preoperatively or postoperatively, significantly increases the need for a permanent colostomy.

A Fast-Track Recovery Protocol Improves Outcomes in Elective Laparoscopic Colectomy for Diverticulitis

BACKGROUND Fast-track (FT) postoperative protocols have been shown to be highly beneficial in open colectomy. Some have questioned the necessity of an FT protocol in the setting of laparoscopic colectomy because hospital stays are short and morbidity is low compared with open surgery. We set out to determine whether an FT protocol has any utility in the setting of elective laparoscopic colectomy. STUDY DESIGN A retrospective review was conducted on a cohort of 334 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic sigmoid resection for diverticulitis from 1998 to 2008, at Mayo Clinic, a tertiary care center in Rochester, MN. There were 235 patients who were managed with traditional postoperative care, and 99 who were managed with an FT protocol initiated in 2006. The main outcomes measures were time to soft diet, length of stay, overall morbidity, and readmission rate. RESULTS Times to soft diet (mean 2.3 vs 3.6 days), and first bowel movement (mean 2.6 vs 3.5 days) were shorter in the FT group (p < 0.001). The median lengths of stay were 3 days (interquartile range 3 to 4 days) and 5 days (interquartile range 4 to 6 days) for the FT and non-FT groups, respectively (p < 0.001). Morbidity was significantly lower in the FT group compared with the non-FT group (15.2% vs 25.5%, p < 0.03). The 30-day readmission rate was 2.9% for the FT group and 7.6% for the non-FT group (p = NS). There were no deaths in either group. CONCLUSIONS Even in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy, FT protocols further improve the speed of gastrointestinal recovery, shorten the length of stay, and decrease morbidity.

Short-term outcomes after elective minimally invasive colectomy for diverticulitis.

The role of minimally invasive surgery in complicated diverticulitis is still being elucidated. The aim of this study was to compare short‐term outcomes in patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for complicated or uncomplicated diverticular disease.

Improving conventional recovery with enhanced recovery in minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways have been shown to decrease the length of hospital stay in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Few reports have studied patients undergoing minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to review our experience in minimally invasive rectal cancer surgery. We report short-term outcomes and evaluate the potential advantages of the enhanced recovery protocol compared with our less intensive conventional pathway. DESIGN: This is a consecutive retrospective study of all minimally invasive rectal cancers treated from February 2005 to December 2011. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to identify factors contributing to a short length of stay. SETTINGS: This study was performed at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, between 2005 and 2011. PATIENTS: A total of 346 patients were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy-eight patients were managed under the enhanced recovery pathway. Patients underwent either laparoscopic-, robotic-, or hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. INTERVENTIONS: All patients followed either a standardized conventional pathway or an enhanced recovery pathway for perioperative care. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the length of stay. Secondary outcomes were postoperative complications and 30-day readmissions. RESULTS: Hospital stay was significantly decreased for patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer and were managed with an enhanced recovery protocol, 4.1 days, vs 6.1 days for the conventional pathway (95% CI, −2.9 to −1.2 days; p < 0.0001). Rates of complications were similar between the 2 groups. Factors associated with shorter length of stay included the enhanced recovery protocol and laparoscopic or robotic surgery compared with hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study at a single institution. Additional limitations include the comparison with historical controls and the potential for selection bias. CONCLUSION: The enhanced recovery pathway is associated with a significantly decreased length of hospital stay after minimally invasive surgery for rectal cancer in this series. Decreased hospital stay was achieved without affecting short-term outcomes.