Outcomes of Ileal Pouch Excision: an American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to define the incidence and risk factors of postoperative morbidity and mortality after pouch excision (PE). METHODS: ACS-NSQIP database was queried for patients who underwent PE between 2005 and 2015. Main outcome measures were 30-day mortality, major morbidity, overall surgical site infections (SSI), reoperation, and length of stay (LOS). Risk factors associated with these outcomes were assessed using multivariate logistic or quantile regression. RESULTS: Three hundred eighty-one patients underwent PE (mean age 47.7(±15.3) years; 51.7% female). Mean body mass index (BMI) was 24.6(±5.7) kg/m2, 55.4% were ASA class 1-2 and 18.4% were immunosuppressed. Mean operative time was 252(±112.7) min, 98% were elective cases, and median LOS was 7(5-11) days. Twenty-eight percent experienced major morbidity, including SSIs (21.5% overall, 9.2% superficial, 3.7% deep, 10.3% organ space), sepsis (9.5%), urinary tract infection (5.8%), and postoperative pneumonia (2.4%). The observed venous thromboembolism rate was low, with 0.5 and 0.8% of patients suffering pulmonary embolism and deep vein thrombosis, respectively; 5.5% required reoperation. Postoperative mortality was 0.8%. On multivariate logistic regression, smoking (OR 3.03 [95% CI 1.56, 5.88]) and operative time (OR 1.003 [95% CI 1.0003, 1.0005) were associated with increased odds of major morbidity. Smoking (OR 3.29 [95% CI 1.65, 6.54]) and operative time (OR 1.002 [95% CI 1.000, 1.004]) were independent risk factors for overall SSI. LOS was significantly increased in patients with major morbidity (3.29 days [95% CI 1.60, 4.99]) and increased operative time (0.013 days [95% CI 0.007, 0.018]). CONCLUSIONS: PE is an operation with significant risk of morbidity. However, mortality was low in the present cohort of patients. Patients who were smokers and had longer operative time had increased risk of overall infectious complications and major morbidity. Furthermore, major morbidity and operative time were associated with increased hospital length of stay following PE.

Perceived effects of the 16-hour workday restriction on surgical specialties: Quebec's experience.

OBJECTIVE: Quebec was the first Canadian province to implement a 16-hour workday restriction. Our aim was to assess and compare Quebec's surgical residents' and professors' perception regarding the effects on the educational environment, quality of care, and quality of life. DESIGN: The Surgical Theater Educational Environment Measure, the Postgraduate Hospital Educational Environment Measure, quality of the medical act, and quality-of-life questionnaires were administered 6 months after the work-hour restrictions. SETTING: Université de Montréal Surgery Department, Montréal, Québec, Canada; Université de Sherbrooke Surgery Department, Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada; Université Laval Surgery Department, Québec, Québec, Canada; and McGill University Surgery Department, Montréal, Québec, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Surgical residents and professors of all specialties within the 4 university surgery departments in Quebec through a voluntary web-based survey. RESULTS: A total of 280 questionnaires were analyzed with response rates of 29.7% and 16.4% for residents and professors, respectively. Data were coded on a scale from 2 (strong improvement perception) to -2 (strong deterioration perception). The professors perceived a higher negative effect than the residents did on the educational environment, i.e., role of autonomy (-0.399 vs. -0.577, p < 0.001), teaching (-0.496 vs. -0.540, p < 0.001), social support (-0.345 vs. -0.535, p < 0.001), and surgical learning (-0.409 vs. -0.626, p < 0.001). The professors also observed a higher negative effect on patients' safety (-0.199 vs. -0.595, p = 0.003) and quality of care (-0.077 vs. -0.421, p = 0.014). The latter was even perceived as unchanged by residents (-0.077, 95% CI: -0.249 to 0.095). The residents perceived a negative effect on their quality of life, whereas the professors believed the contrary (0.500 vs -0.496, p < 0.001). More professors than residents believed residency should be prolonged (80.8% vs. 50.6%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Residents and professors perceive a mild negative effect on the educational environment and quality of care, whereas their perception on quality of life is opposite. The professors seem concerned about adequate training to the point of considering increasing training length.