Justin T. Brady

The HARM score for gastrointestinal surgery: Application and validation of a novel, reliable and simple tool to measure surgical quality and outcomes

BACKGROUND The HospitAl length of stay, Readmissions and Mortality (HARM) score is a simple, inexpensive quality tool, linked directly to patient outcomes. We assess the HARM score for measuring surgical quality across multiple surgical populations. METHODS Upper gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, and colorectal surgery cases between 2005 and 2009 were identified from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project California State Inpatient Database. Composite and individual HARM scores were calculated from length of stay, 30-day readmission and mortality, correlated to complication rates for each hospital and stratified by operative type. RESULTS 71,419 admissions were analyzed. Higher HARM scores correlated with higher complication rates for all cases after risk adjustment and stratification by operation type, elective or emergent status. CONCLUSIONS The HARM score is a simple and valid quality measurement for upper gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary and colorectal surgery. The HARM score could facilitate benchmarking to improve patient outcomes and resource utilization, and may facilitate outcome improvement.

The use of alvimopan for postoperative ileus in small and large bowel resections

Transient ileus is a normal physiologic process after surgery. When prolonged, it is an important contributor to postoperative complications, increased length of stay and increased healthcare costs. Efforts have been made to prevent and manage postoperative ileus; alvimopan is an oral, peripheral μ-opioid receptor antagonist, and the only currently US FDA-approved medication to accelerate the return of gastrointestinal function postoperatively.

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.

The American Society of Colon and rectal surgeons assessment tool for performance of laparoscopic colectomy

BACKGROUND: The lack of consensus for performance assessment of laparoscopic colorectal resection is a major impediment to quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop and assess the validity of an evaluation tool for laparoscopic colectomy that is feasible for wide implementation. DESIGN: During the pilot phase, a small group of experts modified previous assessment tools by watching videos for laparoscopic right colectomy with the following categories of experience: novice (less than 20 cases), intermediate (50–100 cases), and expert (more than 500 cases). After achieving sufficient reliability (&kgr; > 0.8), a user-friendly tool was validated among a large group of blinded, trained experts. SETTING: The study was conducted through the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Operative Competency Evaluation Committee. PATIENTS: Raters were from the Operative Competency Evaluation Committee of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment tool reliability and internal consistency were measured. RESULTS: From October 2014 through February 2015, 4 groups of 5 raters blinded to surgeon skill level evaluated 6 different laparoscopic right colectomy videos (novice = 2, intermediate = 2, expert = 2). The overall Cronbach &agr; was 0.98 (>0.9 = excellent internal consistency). The intraclass correlation for the overall assessment was 0.93 (range, 0.77–0.93) and was >0.74 (excellent) for each step. The average scores (scale, 1–5) for experts were significantly better than those in the intermediate category, with a mean (SD) of 4.51 (0.56) versus 2.94 (0.56; p = 0.003). Videos in the intermediate group scored more favorably than beginner videos for each individual step and overall performance (mean (SD) = 3.00 (0.32) vs 1.78 (0.42); p = 0.006). LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by rater bias to technique and style. CONCLUSIONS: The unique and robust methodology in this trial produced an assessment tool that was feasible for raters to use when assessing videotaped laparoscopic right hemicolectomies. The potential applications for this new tool are widespread, including both training and evaluation of competence at the attending level. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A369, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A370, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A371.

The Trump Effect: With No Peer Review, How Do We Know What to Really Believe on Social Media?

&NA; Social media is a source of news and information for an increasing portion of the general public and physicians. The recent political election was a vivid example of how social media can be used for the rapid spread of “fake news” and that posts on social media are not subject to fact‐checking or editorial review. The medical field is susceptible to propagation of misinformation, with poor differentiation between authenticated and erroneous information. Due to the presence of social “bubbles,” surgeons may not be aware of the misinformation that patients are reading, and thus, it may be difficult to counteract the false information that is seen by the general public. Medical professionals may also be prone to unrecognized spread of misinformation and must be diligent to ensure the information they share is accurate.

Colorectal Cancer Safety Net: Is It Catching Patients Appropriately?

BACKGROUND: Disparities in access to colorectal cancer care are multifactorial and are affected by socioeconomic elements. Uninsured and Medicaid patients present with advanced stage disease and have worse outcomes compared with similar privately insured patients. Safety net hospitals are a major care provider to this vulnerable population. Few studies have evaluated outcomes for safety net hospitals compared with private institutions in colorectal cancer. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare demographics, screening rates, presentation stage, and survival rates between a safety net hospital and a tertiary care center. DESIGN: Comparative review of patients at 2 institutions in the same metropolitan area were conducted. SETTINGS: The study included colorectal cancer care delivered either at 1 safety net hospital or 1 private tertiary care center in the same city from 2010 to 2016. PATIENTS: A total of 350 patients with colorectal cancer from each hospital were evaluated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival across hospital systems was measured. RESULTS: The safety net hospital had significantly more uninsured and Medicaid patients (46% vs 13%; p < 0.001) and a significantly lower median household income than the tertiary care center (

Coregistration of Preoperative MRI with Ex Vivo Mesorectal Pathology Specimens to Spatially Map Post-treatment Changes in Rectal Cancer Onto In Vivo Imaging: Preliminary Findings

39,299 vs

Laparoscopic Detorsion of an Ileal Pouch and Pouch Pexy

49,741; p < 0.0001). At initial presentation, a similar percentage of patients at each hospital presented with stage IV disease (26% vs 20%; p = 0.06). For those undergoing resection, final pathologic stage distribution was similar across groups (p = 0.10). After a comparable median follow-up period (26.6 mo for safety net hospital vs 29.2 mo for tertiary care center), log-rank test for overall survival favored the safety net hospital (p = 0.05); disease-free survival was similar between hospitals (p = 0.40). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective review, reporting from medical charts. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the value of safety net hospitals for providing quality colorectal cancer care, with survival and recurrence outcomes equivalent or improved compared with a local tertiary care center. Because safety net hospitals can provide equivalent outcomes despite socioeconomic inequalities and financial constraints, emphasis should be focused on ensuring that adequate funding for these institutions continues. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A454.

Laparoscopic colectomy in the obese, morbidly obese, and super morbidly obese: when does weight matter?

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES The objective of this study was to develop and quantitatively evaluate a radiology-pathology fusion method for spatially mapping tissue regions corresponding to different chemoradiation therapy-related effects from surgically excised whole-mount rectal cancer histopathology onto preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). MATERIALS AND METHODS This study included six subjects with rectal cancer treated with chemoradiation therapy who were then imaged with a 3-T T2-weighted MRI sequence, before undergoing mesorectal excision surgery. Excised rectal specimens were sectioned, stained, and digitized as two-dimensional (2D) whole-mount slides. Annotations of residual disease, ulceration, fibrosis, muscularis propria, mucosa, fat, inflammation, and pools of mucin were made by an expert pathologist on digitized slide images. An expert radiologist and pathologist jointly established corresponding 2D sections between MRI and pathology images, as well as identified a total of 10 corresponding landmarks per case (based on visually similar structures) on both modalities (five for driving registration and five for evaluating alignment). We spatially fused the in vivo MRI and ex vivo pathology images using landmark-based registration. This allowed us to spatially map detailed annotations from 2D pathology slides onto corresponding 2D MRI sections. RESULTS Quantitative assessment of coregistered pathology and MRI sections revealed excellent structural alignment, with an overall deviation of 1.50 ± 0.63 mm across five expert-selected anatomic landmarks (in-plane misalignment of two to three pixels at 0.67- to 1.00-mm spatial resolution). Moreover, the T2-weighted intensity distributions were distinctly different when comparing fibrotic tissue to perirectal fat (as expected), but showed a marked overlap when comparing fibrotic tissue and residual rectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS Our fusion methodology enabled successful and accurate localization of post-treatment effects on in vivo MRI.

Evaluating surgical management and outcomes of colovaginal fistulas

ileal pouch torsion is a rare but significant complication after total proctocolectomy with iPaa. Patients often have significant adhesions after such an operation, which can make laparoscopic repair difficult. We demonstrate a laparoscopic repair of a pouch torsion with pexy in a patient with ulcerative colitis. after flexible pouchoscopy to detorse the ileal pouch, a rectal tube was placed for decompression. the patient was taken to the operating room for laparoscopic ileal pouch pexy. after abdominal inspection with the laparoscope, adhesions to the anterior pouch were identified as the likely source of the pouch torsion. these were dissected sharply. Visualization of the pouch staple line anteriorly indicated proper pouch orientation. the ileal pouch was then pexied to the left and right pelvic sidewalls using braided permanent suture, making sure not to injure the adjacent pelvic structures. an intraoperative flexible pouchoscopy was performed to evaluate the pouch orientation, and an additional permanent suture was placed to pexy the proximal pouch. mechanical abrasion was performed on the proximal mesentery to promote adhesion formation and prevent future torsion. the patient had an uneventful recovery and has been without complications for 3 years (see supplemental Digital Content 1–4, http://links.lww.com/DCR/a255, http://links. lww.com/DCR/a256, http://links.lww.com/DCR/a257, http://links.lww.com/DCR/a258). Laparoscopic Detorsion of an Ileal Pouch and Pouch Pexy