A pilot trial of vaccination with Carcinoembryonic antigen and Her2/neu peptides in advanced colorectal cancer.

Checkpoint-blockade therapy (CBT) is approved for select colorectal cancer (CRC) patents, but additional immunotherapeutic options are needed. We hypothesized that vaccination with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and Her2/neu (Her2) peptides would be immunogenic and well tolerated by participants with advanced CRC. A pilot clinical trial (NCT00091286) was conducted in HLA-A2+ or -A3+ Stage IIIC-IV CRC patients. Participants were vaccinated weekly with CEA and Her2 peptides plus tetanus peptide and GM-CSF emulsified in Montanide ISA-51 adjuvant for 3 weeks. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded per NIH Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3. Immunogenicity was evaluated by interferon-gamma ELISpot assay of in vitro sensitized peripheral blood mononuclear cells and lymphocytes from the sentinel immunized node. Eleven participants were enrolled and treated; one was retrospectively found to be ineligible due to HLA type. All 11 participants were included in AEs and survival analyses, and the 10 eligible participants were evaluated for immunogenicity. All participants reported AEs: 82% were Grade 1-2, most commonly fatigue or injection site reactions. Two participants (18%) experienced treatment-related dose-limiting Grade 3 AEs; both were self-limiting. Immune responses to Her2 or CEA peptides were detected in 70% of participants. Median overall survival (OS) was 16 months; among those enrolled with no evidence of disease (n = 3), median OS was not reached after 10 years of follow-up. These data demonstrate that vaccination with CEA or Her2 peptides is well tolerated and immunogenic. Further study is warranted to assess potential clinical benefits of vaccination in advanced CRC either alone or in combination with CBT.

Examining the Impact of Using the SIMPL Application on Feedback in Surgical Education.

OBJECTIVE: The System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning (SIMPL) smartphone application allows physicians to provide dictated feedback to surgical residents. The impact of this novel feedback medium on the quality of feedback is unknown. Our objective was to compare the delivery and quality of best-case operative performance feedback given via SIMPL to feedback given in-person. DESIGN: We collected operative performance feedback given both in-person and via SIMPL from surgeons to residents over 6 weeks. Feedback transcripts were coded using Verbal Response Modes speech acts taxonomy to compare the delivery of feedback. We evaluated quality of feedback using a validated resident survey and third-party assessment form. SETTING: University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, a large academic medical institution. PARTICIPANTS: Four surgical attendings and 9 general surgery residents. RESULTS: Nineteen SIMPL and 18 in-person feedback encounters were evaluated. Feedback via SIMPL was more directive (containing thoughts, perceptions, evaluations of resident behavior, or advice) and contained more presumptuous utterances (in which the physician reflected on and assessed resident performance or offered suggestions for improvement) than in-person feedback (p = 0.01). The resident survey showed no significant difference between the quality of feedback given via SIMPL and in-person (p = 0.07). The mean score was 47.74 (SD = 3.00) for SIMPL feedback and 45.33 (SD = 4.77) for in-person feedback, with a total possible score of 50. Third-party assessment showed no significant difference between the quality of feedback given via SIMPL and in-person (p = 0.486). The mean score was 23.40 (SD = 3.75) for SIMPL feedback and 22.25 (SD = 5.94) for in-person feedback, with a total possible score of 30. CONCLUSIONS: Although feedback given via SIMPL was more direct and based on the attendings' perspectives, the quality of the feedback did not differ significantly. Use of the dictation feature of SIMPL to deliver resident operative performance feedback is a reasonable alternative to in-person feedback.

Is the operative autonomy granted to a resident consistent with operative performance quality.

BACKGROUND: We investigated attending surgeon decisions regarding resident operative autonomy, including situations where operative autonomy was discordant with performance quality. METHODS: Attending surgeons assessed operative performance and documented operative autonomy granted to residents from 14 general surgery residency programs. Concordance between performance and autonomy was defined as "practice ready performance/meaningfully autonomous" or "not practice ready/not meaningfully autonomous." Discordant circumstances were practice ready/not meaningfully autonomous or not practice ready/meaningfully autonomous. Resident training level, patient-related case complexity, procedure complexity, and procedure commonality were investigated to determine impact on autonomy. RESULTS: A total of 8,798 assessments were collected from 429 unique surgeons assessing 496 unique residents. Practice-ready and exceptional performances were 20 times more likely to be performed under meaningfully autonomous conditions than were other performances. Meaningful autonomy occurred most often with high-volume, easy and common cases, and less complex procedures. Eighty percent of assessments were concordant (38% practice ready/meaningfully autonomous and 42% not practice ready/not meaningfully autonomous). Most discordant assessments (13.8%) were not practice ready/meaningfully autonomous. For fifth-year residents, practice ready/not meaningfully autonomous ratings (9.7%) were more frequent than not practice ready/meaningfully autonomous ratings (7.5%). Ten surgeons (2.3%) failed to afford residents meaningful autonomy on any occasion. CONCLUSION: Resident operative performance quality is the most important determinant in attending surgeon decisions regarding resident autonomy.

Clinically Competent and Fiscally at Risk: Impact of Debt and Financial Parameters on the Surgical Resident.

BACKGROUND: While the costs of medical training continue to increase, surgeon income and personal financial decisions may be challenged to manage this expanding debt burden. We sought to characterize the financial liability, assets, income, and debt of surgical residents, and evaluate the necessity for additional financial training. STUDY DESIGN: All surgical trainees at a single academic center completed a detailed survey. Questions focused on issues related to debt, equity, cash flow, financial education, and fiscal parameters. Responses were used to calculate debt-to-asset and debt-to-income ratios. Predictors of moderate risk debt-to-asset ratio (0.5 to 0.9), high risk debt-to-asset ratio (≥0.9), and high risk debt-to-income ratio (>0.4) were evaluated. All analyses were performed in SPSS v.21. RESULTS: One hundred five trainees completed the survey (80% response rate), with 38% of respondents reporting greater than $200,000 in educational debt. Overall, 82% of respondents had a moderate or high risk debt-to-asset ratio. Residency program, year, sex, and perception of financial knowledge did not correlate with high risk debt-to-asset ratio. Residents with high debt-to-asset ratios were more likely to have a high level of concern about debt (52% vs 0%, p < 0.001) when compared with residents who had low debt-to-asset ratios. The majority (79%) of respondents felt strongly that inclusion of additional financial training in residency education is a critical need. CONCLUSIONS: In a climate of increasingly delayed financial gratification, surgical trainees are on critically unstable financial footing. There is a major gap in current surgical education that requires reassessment for the long-term financial health of residents.

What factors influence attending surgeon decisions about resident autonomy in the operating room?

BACKGROUND: Educating residents in the operating room requires balancing patient safety, operating room efficiency demands, and resident learning needs. This study explores 4 factors that influence the amount of autonomy supervising surgeons afford to residents. METHODS: We evaluated 7,297 operations performed by 487 general surgery residents and evaluated by 424 supervising surgeons from 14 training programs. The primary outcome measure was supervising surgeon autonomy granted to the resident during the operative procedure. Predictor variables included resident performance on that case, supervising surgeon history with granting autonomy, resident training level, and case difficulty. RESULTS: Resident performance was the strongest predictor of autonomy granted. Typical autonomy by supervising surgeon was the second most important predictor. Each additional factor led to a smaller but still significant improvement in ability to predict the supervising surgeon's autonomy decision. The 4 factors together accounted for 54% of decision variance (r = 0.74). CONCLUSION: Residents' operative performance in each case was the strongest predictor of how much autonomy was allowed in that case. Typical autonomy granted by the supervising surgeon, the second most important predictor, is unrelated to resident proficiency and warrants efforts to ensure that residents perform each procedure with many different supervisors.

Readiness of US General Surgery Residents for Independent Practice.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluates the current state of the General Surgery (GS) residency training model by investigating resident operative performance and autonomy. BACKGROUND: The American Board of Surgery has designated 132 procedures as being "Core" to the practice of GS. GS residents are expected to be able to safely and independently perform those procedures by the time they graduate. There is growing concern that not all residents achieve that standard. Lack of operative autonomy may play a role. METHODS: Attendings in 14 General Surgery programs were trained to use a) the 5-level System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning (SIMPL) Performance scale to assess resident readiness for independent practice and b) the 4-level Zwisch scale to assess the level of guidance (ie, autonomy) they provided to residents during specific procedures. Ratings were collected immediately after cases that involved a categorical GS resident. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and supplemented with Bayesian ordinal model-based estimation. RESULTS: A total of 444 attending surgeons rated 536 categorical residents after 10,130 procedures. Performance: from the first to the last year of training, the proportion of Performance ratings for Core procedures (n = 6931) at "Practice Ready" or above increased from 12.3% to 77.1%. The predicted probability that a typical trainee would be rated as Competent after performing an average Core procedure on an average complexity patient during the last week of residency training is 90.5% (95% CI: 85.7%-94%). This falls to 84.6% for more complex patients and to less than 80% for more difficult Core procedures. Autonomy: for all procedures, the proportion of Zwisch ratings indicating meaningful autonomy ("Passive Help" or "Supervision Only") increased from 15.1% to 65.7% from the first to the last year of training. For the Core procedures performed by residents in their final 6 months of training (cholecystectomy, inguinal/femoral hernia repair, appendectomy, ventral hernia repair, and partial colectomy), the proportion of Zwisch ratings (n = 357) indicating near-independence ("Supervision Only") was 33.3%. CONCLUSIONS: US General Surgery residents are not universally ready to independently perform Core procedures by the time they complete residency training. Progressive resident autonomy is also limited. It is unknown if the amount of autonomy residents do achieve is sufficient to ensure readiness for the entire spectrum of independent practice.

Resident training in a teaching hospital: How do attendings teach in the real operative environment?

BACKGROUND: The study aim was to explore the nature of intraoperative education and its interaction with the environment where surgical education occurs. METHODS: Video and audio recording captured teaching interactions between colorectal surgeons and general surgery residents during laparoscopic segmental colectomies. Cases and collected data were analyzed for teaching behaviors and workflow disruptions. Flow disruptions (FDs) are considered deviations from natural case progression. RESULTS: Across 10 cases (20.4 operative hours), attendings spent 11.2 hours (54.7%) teaching, using directing (M = 250.1), and confirming (M = 236.1) most. FDs occurred 410 times, accounting for 4.4 hours of case time (21.57%). Teaching occurred with FD events for 2.4 hours (22.2%), whereas 77.8% of teaching happened outside FD occurrence. Teaching methods shifted from active to passive during FD events to compensate for patient safety. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding how FDs impact operative learning will inform faculty development in managing interruptions and improve its integration into resident education.

Integrating Postoperative Feedback Into Workflow: Perceived Practices and Barriers.

OBJECTIVE: Previous studies have found that both resident and staff surgeons highly value postoperative feedback; and that such feedback has high educational value. However, little is known about how to consistently deliver this feedback. Our aim was to understand how often surgical residents should receive feedback and what barriers are preventing this from occurring. DESIGN: Surveys were distributed to resident and attending surgeons. Questions focused on the current frequency of postoperative feedback, desired frequency and methods of feedback, and perceived barriers. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics, and text responses were examined using coding. SETTING: University-based general surgery department at a Midwestern institution. PARTICIPANTS: General surgery residents (n = 23) and attending surgeons (n = 22) participated in this study. RESULTS: Residents reported receiving and staff reported giving feedback for procedure-specific performance after 25% versus 34% of cases, general technical feedback after 36% versus 32%, and nontechnical performance after 17% versus 18%. Both perceived procedure-specific and general technical feedback should be given more than 80% of the time, and nontechnical feedback should happen for nearly 60% of cases. Verbal feedback immediately after the operation was rated as best practice. Both parties identified time, conflicting responsibilities, lack of privacy, and discomfort with giving and receiving meaningful feedback as barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Both resident and staff surgeons agree that postoperative feedback is given far less often than it should. Future work should study intraoperative and postoperative feedback to validate resident and attending surgeons' perceptions such that interventions to improve and facilitate this process can be developed.

The Feasibility of Real-Time Intraoperative Performance Assessment With SIMPL (System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning): Early Experience From a Multi-institutional Trial.

PURPOSE: Intraoperative performance assessment of residents is of growing interest to trainees, faculty, and accreditors. Current approaches to collect such assessments are limited by low participation rates and long delays between procedure and evaluation. We deployed an innovative, smartphone-based tool, SIMPL (System for Improving and Measuring Procedural Learning), to make real-time intraoperative performance assessment feasible for every case in which surgical trainees participate, and hypothesized that SIMPL could be feasibly integrated into surgical training programs. METHODS: Between September 1, 2015 and February 29, 2016, 15 U.S. general surgery residency programs were enrolled in an institutional review board-approved trial. SIMPL was made available after 70% of faculty and residents completed a 1-hour training session. Descriptive and univariate statistics analyzed multiple dimensions of feasibility, including training rates, volume of assessments, response rates/times, and dictation rates. The 20 most active residents and attendings were evaluated in greater detail. RESULTS: A total of 90% of eligible users (1267/1412) completed training. Further, 13/15 programs began using SIMPL. Totally, 6024 assessments were completed by 254 categorical general surgery residents (n = 3555 assessments) and 259 attendings (n = 2469 assessments), and 3762 unique operations were assessed. There was significant heterogeneity in participation within and between programs. Mean percentage (range) of users who completed ≥1, 5, and 20 assessments were 62% (21%-96%), 34% (5%-75%), and 10% (0%-32%) across all programs, and 96%, 75%, and 32% in the most active program. Overall, response rate was 70%, dictation rate was 24%, and mean response time was 12 hours. Assessments increased from 357 (September 2015) to 1146 (February 2016). The 20 most active residents each received mean 46 assessments by 10 attendings for 20 different procedures. CONCLUSIONS: SIMPL can be feasibly integrated into surgical training programs to enhance the frequency and timeliness of intraoperative performance assessment. We believe SIMPL could help facilitate a national competency-based surgical training system, although local and systemic challenges still need to be addressed.

Evaluating the effectiveness of a mock oral educational program.

BACKGROUND: To obtain board certification, the American Board of Surgery requires graduates of general surgery training programs to pass both the written qualifying examination (QE) and the oral certifying examination (CE). In 2015, the pass rates for the QE and CE were 80% and 77%, respectively. In the 2011-2012 academic year, the University of Wisconsin instituted a mandatory, faculty-led, monthly CE preparation educational program (CE prep) as a supplement to their existing annual mock oral examination. We hypothesized that the implementation of these sessions would improve the first-time pass rate for residents taking the ABS CE at our institution. Secondary outcomes studied were QE pass rate, correlation with American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (ABSITE) and mock oral examination scores, cost, and type of study materials used, perception of examination difficulty, and applicant preparedness. METHODS: A sixteen question survey was sent to 57 of 59 residents who attended the University of Wisconsin between the years of 2007 and 2015. Email addresses for two former residents could not be located. De-identified data for the ABSITE and first-time pass rates for the QE and CE examination were retrospectively collected and analyzed along with survey results. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS version 22 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY). P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Survey response rate was 77.2%. Of the residents who have attempted the CE, first-time pass rate was 76.0% (19 of 25) before the implementation of the formal CE Prep and 100% (22 of 22) after (P = 0.025). Absolute ABSITE score, and mock oral annual examination grades were significantly improved after the CE Prep was initiated (P values < 0.001 and 0.003, respectively), however, ABSITE percentile was not significantly different (P = 0.415). ABSITE raw score and percentile, as well as mock oral annual examination scores were significantly associated with passing the QE (0.032, 0.027, and 0.020, respectively), whereas mock oral annual examination scores alone were associated with passing the CE (P = 0.001). Survey results showed that residents perceived the CE to be easier than the annual mock oral after the institution of the CE prep course (P = 0.036), however, there was no difference in their perception of preparedness. Overall, applicants felt extremely prepared for the CE (4.70 ± 0.5, Likert scale 1-5). CONCLUSIONS: Formal educational programs instituted during residency can improve resident performance on the ABS certifying examination. The institution of a formal, faculty-led monthly CE preparation educational program at the University of Wisconsin has significantly improved the first-time pass rate for the ABS CE. Mock oral annual examination scores were also significantly improved. Furthermore, ABSITE scores correlate with QE pass rates, and mock oral annual examination scores correlate with pass rates for both QE and CE.

Short-term outcomes of minimally invasive versus open colectomy for colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic and open approaches to colon resection have equivalent long-term outcomes and oncologic integrity for the treatment of colon cancer. Differences in short-term outcomes should therefore help to guide surgeons in their choice of operation. We hypothesized that minimally invasive colectomy is associated with superior short-term outcomes compared to traditional open colectomy in the setting of colon cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing nonemergent colectomy for colon cancer in 2012 and 2013 were selected from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) targeted colectomy participant use file. Patients were divided into two cohorts based on operative approach-open versus minimally invasive surgery (MIS). Univariate, multivariate, and propensity-adjusted multivariate analyses were performed to compare postoperative outcomes between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 11,031 patients were identified for inclusion in the study, with an overall MIS rate of 65.3% (n = 7200). On both univariate and multivariate analysis, MIS approach was associated with fewer postoperative complications and lower mortality. In the risk-adjusted multivariate analysis, MIS approach was associated with an odds ratio of 0.598 for any postoperative morbidity compared to open (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study of patients undergoing colectomy for colon cancer demonstrates significantly improved outcomes associated with a MIS approach, even when controlling for baseline differences in illness severity. When feasible, minimally invasive colectomy should be considered gold standard for the surgical treatment of colon cancer.

Does Anastomotic Leak Contribute to High Failure-to-rescue Rates?

OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to evaluate failure-to-rescue (FTR) after anastomotic leak (AL) in colectomy patients. BACKGROUND: In the era of pay for performance, it is imperative that we understand the quality measures under which we are scrutinized. FTR has been proposed as a marker of surgical quality. We investigated the role of complications in FTR rates in colectomy patients. METHODS: Patients who underwent nonemergent colectomy from 2012 to 2013 were identified from the The American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP database). Mortality after AL was assessed and stratified in relation to mortality after other postoperative complications. χ and logistic regression analysis were used to assess the effect of AL on mortality. RESULTS: We identified 30,101 patients who met inclusion criteria, 1127 suffered an AL (3.7%). FTR was increased in patients with AL compared with those without AL (6% vs 1%, P < 0.001). The mortality rate after leak was similar to mortality after other major complications. Independent risk factors for death after AL included older age (odds ratio [OR] 3.140; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.744-5.651), cancer diagnosis (OR 2.032; 95% CI, 1.177-3.507), and open approach (OR 2.124; 95% CI, 1.194-3.776) while preoperative bowel preparation was protective (OR 0.563; 95% CI, 0.328-0.969). CONCLUSIONS: AL is a common complication after colectomy with a relatively high FTR rate. As hospitals are penalized for not reaching specific rates of FTR, we must better understand these complex relationships to improve quality and safety of patient care.

Postoperative Ileus--More than Just Prolonged Length of Stay?

PURPOSE: Given that postoperative ileus is common in colectomy patients, we sought to examine the association of ileus with adverse events in this patient population. METHODS: The ACS NSQIP puf file from 2012 to 2013 was queried for non-emergent colectomy cases. Predictors of other poor postoperative outcomes in patients who experienced postoperative ileus were assessed using chi-squared and multivariable regression analyses. Chi-squared analysis was used to assess for additive effects of ileus and other postoperative complications on mortality. p Values <0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: We identified 32,392 patients who underwent non-emergent colectomy. Longer length of stay, higher complication, reoperation, readmission, and mortality rates were identified in patients with ileus (p < 0.001 for all). Overall, 59% of patients with ileus had at least one adverse outcome, compared with 25% of patients without ileus (p < 0.001). Patients who developed ileus in the absence of other complications had an identical mortality rate to patients without ileus (1%). Additional complications led to incremental increases in mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ileus and multiple complications are at significantly increased risk for adverse outcomes. Older patients with more comorbidity were found to be at risk for adverse outcomes in addition to ileus, begging the question of whether these patients may benefit from preoperative optimization.

Characterizing readmission in ulcerative colitis patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative readmissions increase costs and affect patient quality of life. Ulcerative colitis (UC) patients are at a high risk for hospital readmission following restorative proctocolectomy (RP). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to characterize UC patients undergoing RP and identify causes and risk factors for readmission. DESIGN: A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained institutional database was performed. Postoperative readmission rates and reasons for readmission were examined following RP. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to evaluate for risk factors associated with readmission. RESULTS: Of 533 patients who met our inclusion criteria, 18.2 % (n = 97) were readmitted within 30 days while 22.7 % (n = 121) were readmitted within 90 days of stage I of RP. Younger patient age (OR 1.825, 95 % CI 1.139-2.957), laparoscopic approach (OR 1.943, 95 % CI 1.217-3.104), and increased length of initial stay (OR 1.155, 95 % CI 1.090-1.225) were all associated with 30-day readmission. The most common reason for readmission was dehydration/ileus/partial bowel obstruction, with 10 % of patients readmitted for this reason within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing restorative proctocolectomy are at high risk for readmission, particularly following the first stage of the operation. Novel treatment pathways to prevent ileus and dehydration as an outpatient may decrease the rates of readmission following RP.

Rural Surgery--A Crisis in Wisconsin.

Recruitment of general surgeons to practice in rural environments is challenging. We believe that innovative training programs focusing on the specific needs and experiences of rural surgical practice can play an important role in addressing this clinical workforce issue. For practical reasons, our program will start out small, but if 50 centers around the nation were to establish a similar rural track, we could see a substantial collective impact over time. We hope our new program will serve as a model for the development of other university-based residency training programs with similar opportunities. We are grateful to have received state funding to support the development and early implementation of this program (see Table). We commend the state for understanding the importance of primary care surgery, and we look forward to measuring and reporting the impact of our rural training program on rural surgical care in Wisconsin.

Utilizing a novel tool for the comprehensive assessment of resident operative performance.

PURPOSE: A mechanism for more effective and comprehensive assessment of surgical residents' performance in the operating room (OR) is needed, especially in light of the new requirements issued by the American Board of Surgery. Furthermore, there is an increased awareness that assessments need to be more meaningful by including not only procedure-specific and general technical skills, but also nontechnical skills (NOTECHS), such as teamwork and communication skills. Our aims were to develop a methodology and create a tool that comprehensively assesses residents' operative performance. METHODS: A procedure-specific technical skill assessment for laparoscopic colon resections was created through use of task analysis. Components of previously validated tools were added to broaden the assessment to include general technical skills and NOTECHS. Our instrument was then piloted in the OR to measure face and content validity through an iterative process with faculty evaluators. Once the tool was finalized, postgraduate 3 (PG3) and PG5 residents on a 2-month long rotation were assessed by 1 of 4 colorectal surgeons immediately after completing a case together. Construct validity was measured by evaluating the difference in scores between PG3 and PG5 residents' performance as well as the change in scores over the course of the rotation. RESULTS: Sixty-three assessments were performed. All evaluations were completed within 48 hours of the operation. There was a statistically significant difference between the PG3 and PG5 scores on procedure-specific performance, general technical skills, NOTECHS, and overall performance. Over the course of the rotation, a statistically significant improvement was found in residents' scores on the procedure-specific portion of the assessment but not on the general surgical skills or NOTECHS. CONCLUSION: This is a feasible, valid, and reliable assessment tool for the comprehensive evaluation of resident performance in the OR. We plan to use this tool to assess resident operative skill development and to improve direct resident feedback.

Postoperative complications in patients with rectal cancer are associated with delays in chemotherapy that lead to worse disease-free and overall survival.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify the risk factors for delays in chemotherapy after rectal cancer surgery and evaluate the effects of delayed therapy on long-term outcomes. We also sought to clarify what time frame should be used to define delayed adjuvant chemotherapy. BACKGROUND: Postoperative complications have been found to influence the timing of chemotherapy in patients with colon cancer. Delays in chemotherapy have been shown to be associated with worse overall and disease-free survival in patients with colorectal cancer, although the timing of delay has not been agreed upon in the literature. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained rectal cancer database. Univariate analysis was used to identify risk factors for delayed chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to compare overall and disease-free survival in patients based on complications and timing of chemotherapy. SETTINGS: This study was performed at the University of Wisconsin Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin, between 1995 and 2012. PATIENTS: Patients with rectal cancer who underwent proctectomy with curative intent were included in this study. OUTCOME MEASURES: Timing of chemotherapy, 30-day complications, and 30-day readmissions were the main outcome measures. RESULTS: Postoperative complications and 30-day readmissions were associated with delays in chemotherapy ≥8 weeks after surgery. Patients who received chemotherapy ≥8 weeks postoperatively were found to have worse local and distant recurrence rates and worse overall survival in comparison with patients who received chemotherapy within 8 weeks of surgery. LIMITATIONS: The limitations of this study include its retrospective nature and that it was performed at a single institution. CONCLUSIONS: We found complications and readmissions to be risk factors for delayed chemotherapy. Patients who received therapy ≥8 weeks postoperatively had worse disease-free and overall survival.

Predictors of mortality after emergent surgery for acute colonic diverticulitis: analysis of National Surgical Quality Improvement Project data.

BACKGROUND: The surgical treatment of acute colonic diverticulitis is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. However, patient and operative characteristics associated with mortality in this patient population are unclear. We hypothesize that demographic and perioperative variables can be used to predict postoperative mortality.The purpose of this study was to identify perioperative variables predictive of postoperative mortality after emergent surgery for acute diverticulitis. METHODS: Patients with diverticulitis undergoing colostomy and/or partial colectomy with or without primary anastomosis were retrieved from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for years 2005 to 2008 inclusive. Only patients undergoing emergent surgery for acute diverticulitis were included. Univariate analyses were performed to compare demographic characteristics, preoperative laboratory values, comorbidities, and intraoperative variables. Variables with a significant (p < 0.10) difference between survivors and nonsurvivors were included in a stepwise logistic regression model to determine predictors of 30-day mortality. Concordance indices (c indices) for postoperative mortality were calculated using 2005 to 2008 data to determine predictive accuracy and validated on 2009 data. RESULTS: A total of 2,214 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 61 years, and 50% of patients were male. Thirty-day mortality was 5.1%. Nine preoperative variables were significantly associated with postoperative mortality on multivariable analysis. The c index of this nine-variable model was 0.901. Renal dysfunction, hypoalbuminemia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and age were chosen to create a simpler model, with a c index of 0.886 for 2005 to 2008 data and 0.893 for 2009 data. CONCLUSION: Four readily available perioperative variables can be used to predict 30-day mortality after emergent surgery for acute diverticulitis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic study, level II.

Comparable postoperative morbidity and mortality after laparoscopic and open emergent restorative colectomy: outcomes from the ACS NSQIP.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery is safe and effective in the management of common abdominal emergencies. However, there is currently a lack of data about its use for emergency colorectal surgery. We hypothesized that laparoscopy can improve the postoperative outcomes of emergency restorative colon resection. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing emergent open and laparoscopic colon resection with primary anastomosis were retrieved from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database for the years 2005 to 2008 inclusive. Demographic and operative characteristics, laboratory values, and postoperative outcomes were compared between patients undergoing laparoscopic and open colon resection using univariate analyses, multivariate logistic regression, and propensity score analyses. RESULTS: A total of 341 laparoscopic (9.6 %) and 3211 (90.4 %) open colon resections were included. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had a significantly lower prevalence of co-morbidities and better postoperative outcomes. On multivariate analysis, laparoscopic surgery was an independent predictor of a longer operating time (p < 0.001) and shorter total (p = 0.013) and postoperative (p = 0.004) hospital stays, but it did not affect the need for intraoperative blood transfusion (p = 0.488), the 30-day reoperation rates (p = 0.969), or mortality (p = 0.417). After adjusted propensity score analysis, postoperative morbidity (p = 0.833) and mortality (p = 0.568) were comparable in patients undergoing laparoscopic and open surgery. CONCLUSIONS: On a national scale, laparoscopic emergent colon resections are being performed in a small number of patients, who have favorable co-morbidity characteristics and improved postoperative outcomes. Laparoscopic emergent colon resection with primary anastomosis has postoperative morbidity and mortality rates comparable to those seen with the open approach, and it reduces the total and postoperative length of hospital stay.