Comparison of surgical outcomes for colostomy closure performed by acute care surgeons versus a dedicated colorectal surgery service.

BACKGROUND: Despite colostomy closure being a common procedure, it remains highly morbid. Previous literature suggests that complication rates, including surgical site infections, intra-abdominal abscess, and anastomotic failures, reach as high as 50%. With the creation of a dedicated colorectal service, colostomy reversals have been largely migrated from the acute care surgery services. This study analyzes the differences in outcomes in colostomy closures performed between colorectal surgeons and acute care surgeons. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed our experience with 127 colostomy closures performed in our hospital system by acute care surgeons and colorectal surgeons from 2016 through 2020. Demographic data, operative data, and outcomes such as abscess formation, anastomotic leak, and readmission were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis was performed for intraabdominal abscesses and anastomotic leaks. RESULTS: In total, 71 colostomy closures were performed by colorectal surgeons (56%) and 56 by acute care surgeons (43%). The majority of colostomy reversals were after Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis. No differences in demographics were identified, except for a shorter interval to closure in the acute care surgeons group (10.0 vs 7.2 months; P = .049). Two (3.6%) acute care surgeon patients required colorectal surgeon consultation during the definitive repair. Regression analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio 2.43; P = .001), male gender (odds ratio -2.39; P = .18), and colorectal surgeons (odds ratio -2.28; P = .025) as significant risk factors for anastomotic leak. CONCLUSION: Analysis of the current series identified female gender and increased body mass index as higher risk, while procedures performed by colorectal surgeons were at decreased risk for anastomotic leak. Our study identified colostomy reversals performed by a dedicated colorectal service decreased the rate of anastomotic leak.

Balloon-assisted remote external iliac artery endarterectomy: A safe and durable technique for the treatment of iliac artery occlusive disease.

BACKGROUND: Historically, the treatment of iliac artery occlusive disease required a surgical bypass usually consisting of an aortobifemoral bypass or an iliofemoral bypass. With the advent of balloon angioplasty and stenting, these procedures are frequently replaced with endovascular options. However, the treatment of diffuse occlusive disease of the external iliac artery (EIA) using balloon angioplasty and/or stenting does not carry a favorable long-term patency rate. Remote endarterectomy of the EIA using ring dissectors with balloon assistance provides a novel, controlled, safe, and durable treatment of the diseased and/or occluded EIA. METHODS: A retrospective review over the past 6 years was performed at our institution identifying patients treated with balloon-assisted remote endarterectomy of the EIA by the current five practicing vascular surgeons. The technique involves exposure of the ipsilateral common femoral artery. With nonocclusive disease, direct access into the common femoral artery is performed, a wire is traversed through the diseased EIA, and a balloon is inflated at the origin of the vessel providing hemostasis and control. A femoral endarterectomy is performed, and a ring dissector is passed over the endarterectomized material including the wire and balloon catheter and advanced remotely through the EIA up to the balloon. The balloon is briefly deflated, repositioned within the ring dissector, and reinflated, thus cutting the plaque. This allows for retraction of the inflated balloon and cutter, removing the endarterectomized core plaque. The procedure is similar for the treatment of an occluded EIA, but wire access across the occluded vessel is normally achieved with contralateral access. In both cases, the balloon provides control and hemostasis and is critically important in the rare treatment of vessel rupture. RESULTS: A total of 101 vessels were treated in 97 patients. The procedure was successful in 98 vessels (97%) with failure related to vessel rupture requiring conversion to an iliofemoral bypass. The estimated patency rate at three years was 94% with a median follow-up of 20 months. Restenosis/occlusion in four patients seemed to be related to a severe sclerotic response. The EIA was occluded 32% of the time. The common iliac artery (CIA) was diseased requiring angioplasty and stenting 29% of the time and a stent was placed at the transition zone between endarterectomized vessel and nontreated proximal most EIA or distal most CIA 58% of the time. There were no perioperative deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Balloon-assisted remote endarterectomy of the diffusely diseased and/or occluded EIA is a safe and durable option. It precludes the need for a prosthetic conduit and the risk of associated infection. It also involves a single groin incision and negates the need for retroperitoneal exposure of the CIA.