Getting back to work: A framework and pivot plan to resume elective surgery and procedures after COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has compelled a majority of hospital systems to reduce surgical and procedural volumes in an attempt to preserve resources. Elective surgery and procedures resumption has proven to be a calculated risk between COVID-19 exposure and resource depletion and patient morbidity and mortality from surgical deferral. METHODS: Within a few days of halting elective surgery and procedures, our 7-hospital (2427 in-patient beds, 26,647 inpatient surgeries) healthcare system developed a multidisciplinary Pivot Plan with the primary outcome of a phased resumption of elective surgery and procedures. The plan entailed the integration of our electronic medical record, order entry automatization, perioperative staff utilization, partnering with primary care providers, and a stepwise COVID-19 testing algorithm based on a predetermined hierarchy of case acuity and timeliness of patient care. RESULTS: The Pivot Plan was instituted on May 10, 2020. Since then, 22,624 patients have been tested for COVID-19 in anticipation of an elective surgery and procedures; 140 (0.62%) tested positive for COVID-19 and had their procedure deferred. As our testing capability has increased, we have been able to increase our added elective surgery and procedures capacity from 13 cases per day to 531 cases per day. In turn, we have seen the case volume increase by 52%. CONCLUSION: Our academic healthcare system located in one of the initial COVID-19 hotspots in the United States has successfully resumed elective surgery and procedures in part due to a receptive and supportive culture based upon nimbleness, agility, and rapid integration of multiple resources from a cohort of diverse disciplines applied to the perioperative services workflow.

Evolution of technique in performance of minimally invasive colectomies.

BACKGROUND: Hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery is commonly used in colorectal surgery and provides benefit in complex cases. OBJECTIVE: This study examined the minimally invasive surgical trends, patient characteristics, and operative variables unique to patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery. DESIGN: This was a retrospective medical chart review. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in a tertiary care medical center. PATIENTS: Patients included in the study were those who underwent pure laparoscopic colectomies, hand-assisted laparoscopic colectomies, and traditional open surgery for elective treatment of diverticular disease, colorectal cancer, IBD, and benign polyp disease. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcomes included patient characteristics and operative variables unique to patients undergoing hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery and documentation of operative technique trends within an experienced colorectal group. RESULTS: Diverticular disease characteristics specific to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery included the presence of dense inflammatory adhesions (p < 0.0001), diverticular fistulas (p < 0.0001), and unresolved phlegmon (p = 0.0003). Characteristics specific for colorectal cancer included intraoperative tumor bulk (p < 0.0001) and the inability to achieve appropriate surgical resection margins (p < 0.001). Similarly, variables identified for benign polyp disease included adhesions (p < 0.0001) and the ability to gain adequate exposure (p < 0.0001). Limited use of hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery was observed in patients with IBD. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective, observational study from a single center. CONCLUSIONS: Conversion to hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery provides benefit in surgical scenarios where dense inflammatory adhesions, diverticular fistulas, and intra-abdominal postdiverticulitis phlegmon are present. In addition, benefit is observed in patients with colorectal cancer where laparoscopic dissection of bulky tumor proves to be difficult and where the technical ability to obtain margins using pure laparoscopy is compromised. Although our practice has changed to favor pure laparoscopy, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery continues to play an important role in complex colorectal cases that otherwise would require open surgery (see video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A146).

Robot-assisted laparoscopic ileal ureter.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A patient with a solitary kidney, cysteine stones, and recurrent ureteral strictures underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic ureterectomy with ileal ureter formation. METHODS: Using a transperitoneal, 4-port robotic approach, we removed the strictured ureter and created an ileal ureter. The ileal-pyelo and ileal-vesical anastomoses were performed using the robotic system. An extracorporeal bowel anastomosis was performed using stapling devices. Operative time was 9 hours with negligible blood loss, and the patient was discharged after 5 days. RESULTS: A cystogram at 10 days demonstrated patent anastomoses without extravasation. The patient continues to do well 48 months later. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted laparoscopic ileal ureter replacement is feasible with excellent long-term outcome.

The New England colorectal cancer quality project: a prospective multi-institutional feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The need for risk-adjusted databases to benchmark quality is well recognized. Data entry is typically performed by physician surrogates who are variably involved in patient care and might be unable to capture key elements of patient care known only to the operating surgeon. The primary purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility of developing a multi-institutional, prospective, surgeon-initiated database and, secondarily, to compare the data collected with chart review. STUDY DESIGN: The New England Colorectal Society project registry was a prospective, multi-institutional regional database of consecutive patients undergoing operation for colorectal cancer at 13 participating institutions from July 2003 to June 2004. Three sites were chosen for case entry compliance and a random 10% sampling of cases was selected for chart review. RESULTS: Five hundred sixty-nine patients were entered by 26 surgeons at 13 study sites. Two hundred nineteen complications were reported in 168 patients including 6 deaths (1.1%). Case entry compliance ranged from 45% to 100% by site and 25.5% to 100% by surgeon. There was at least one discrepancy between surgeon entry and chart review in 96% of cases; intraoperative complications and key surgical details reported by the surgeon were frequently absent from the chart. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons will participate in a collaborative, multi-institutional quality database. Compliance was variable, indicating that surgeon data entry cannot reliably replace other means of data collection. The surgeon might be able to provide key pieces of data, not otherwise available, that can be critical to understanding and improving outcomes.

Practice parameters for the surgical treatment of ulcerative colitis.

The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons is dedicated to assuring high-quality patient care by advancing the science, prevention, and management of disorders and diseases of the colon, rectum, and anus. The Standards Committee is composed of Society members who are chosen because they have demonstrated expertise in the specialty of colon and rectal surgery. This committee was created to lead international efforts in defining quality care for conditions related to the colon, rectum, and anus. This is accompanied by developing Clinical Practice Guidelines based on the best available evidence. These guidelines are inclusive, and not prescriptive. Their purpose is to provide information on which decisions can be made, rather than dictate a specific form of treatment. These guidelines are intended for the use of all practitioners, health care workers, and patients who desire information about the management of the conditions addressed by the topics covered in these guidelines. It should be recognized that these guidelines should not be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care or exclusive of methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate judgment regarding the propriety of any specific procedure must be made by the physician in light of all of the circumstances presented by the individual patient.

Colovesical fistula: not a contraindication to elective laparoscopic colectomy.

PURPOSE: Traditionally, diverticular fistula was thought to be a contraindication for laparoscopic colectomy. The advent of hand-assisted laparoscopy has allowed repair of a diverticular fistula to be technically feasible laparoscopically. We present our experience with laparoscopic colectomy in patients with diverticular fistulas. METHODS: Patients with colovesical or colovaginal fistulas secondary to diverticular disease were consecutively entered into a database over a five-year period. All operations were electively performed by a single group of colorectal surgeons. Patient demographics, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification, type of surgery, operating time, hospital length of stay, and early and late complications were recovered by chart review. These results were then compared to results from a group of patients who had undergone elective laparoscopic colectomy for recurrent diverticulitis during the same period by the same group of surgeons. RESULTS: Altogether, 40 consecutive operations for diverticular fistulas were performed, 36 of which were started laparoscopically (90 percent). The average patient age was 65 years and the average American Society of Anesthesiologists class was 2. Patient demographics were similar among the group with recurrent diverticulitis (n = 149). The average hospital stay was 6.2 days for the fistula group and 4.4 days in the recurrent diverticulitis group. The average operating time was 220 minutes for the fistula group vs. 176 minutes for the uncomplicated group (P < 0.002). The conversion rate was significantly higher in the fistula group (25 percent vs. 5 percent, P < 0.001). There were no postoperative anastomotic leaks or bleeding episodes requiring reoperation in the fistula group. CONCLUSIONS: Diverticular fistula should no longer be considered a contraindication for laparoscopic colectomy. These cases are more complex, as evidenced by the longer operating times and higher conversion rates when compared with resections for uncomplicated recurrent diverticulitis. Although the length of hospital stay was longer for patients who underwent laparoscopic colectomy for diverticular fistula, those whose operations were completed laparoscopically had the same outcome as patients with uncomplicated disease. We anticipate that minimally invasive surgery will become the standard of care for colovesical fistula, as it now is for uncomplicated diverticular disease.