Localizing ureteral catheters for left-sided colectomy and proctectomy: Do the risks justify the benefits?

BACKGROUND: The role of ureteral catheters in left-sided colectomies and proctectomies remains debated. Given the rarity of ureteral injury, prior retrospective studies were underpowered to detect potentially small, but meaningful differences. This study seeks to determine the role and morbidity of ureteral catheters in left-sided colectomy and proctectomy using a large, national database. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Project from 2012 to 2018 was queried. Left-sided colectomies or proctectomies were included. Propensity score matching and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: 8419 patients with ureteral catherization and 128,021 patients without catheterization were included. After matching, there was not a significant difference in ureteral injury between the groups (0.7% with vs 0.9% without, p = 0.07). Ureteral catheters were associated with increased overall morbidity and longer operative time. Increasing body mass index, operations for diverticular disease, conversion to open, T4 disease and increasing operative complexity were associated with ureteral injury (p < 0.01 for all). CONCLUSIONS: Ureteral catheterization was not associated with decreased rates of ureteral injury when including all left-sided colectomies. High-risk patients for ureteral injury include those with obesity, diverticular disease, and conversion to open. Selective ureteral catheterization may be warranted in these settings.

Clostridium difficile colitis: A clinical review.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile colitis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in the surgical patient. In recent years, Clostridium difficile infections have shown marked increases in frequency, severity, and resistance to standard treatment. With urgent operative interventions and novel endoscopic approaches, pseudomembranous colitis is being seen more commonly in surgical practices. DATA SOURCES: In this paper, we will review a number of papers from the literature. We will discuss the epidemiology, evaluation and treatment of Clostridium difficile infection. Fulminant colitis may require emergency operation. For the surgical endoscopist, fecal microbiota transplantation restores the gastrointestinal flora, and has been shown to be effective in more than 80% of patients. CONCLUSION: Clostridium difficile infection is a major cause of healthcare-related diarrhea leading to increased morbidity and mortality in surgical patients. Increases in failure rates and resistance to current treatments are clinical and economic challenges in the healthcare situation.

Bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement in restorative proctectomy and anterior resection: a randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic complications, including leaks, strictures/stenoses, and bleeding, cause considerable mortality and morbidity after colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess whether the use of a synthetic, bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement material with circular staplers would reduce postoperative anastomotic leakage in patients with a colorectal, coloanal, or ileoanal anastomosis. DESIGN: This was a randomized study that compared outcomes in patients in whom the reinforcement material was used with those in patients who were not given the material. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at several centers in the United States. PATIENTS: The 258 patients (123 in the reinforcement group and 135 control subjects) underwent surgery for a variety of conditions, but most (n = 200) were treated for rectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures were occurrence of anastomotic leaks and other complications according to the study protocol. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in the 2 study groups with respect to age, BMI, ASA physical status, operating time, diagnosis, previous chemoradiotherapy, surgical technique, or 30-day complications, except for a higher rate of small-bowel obstruction (p = 0.03) and anastomotic stricture (p = 0.006) in the control group. The overall anastomotic leak rate was 12% (bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement, 11.4%; no bioabsorbable staple line reinforcement, 12.6%). LIMITATIONS: The study was nonblinded and was terminated at the first planned interim analysis because of insufficient power to detect an intergroup difference in anastomotic leak rate in the time allotted for the investigation. CONCLUSIONS: Reinforcing the circular staple line in colorectal anastomoses with bioabsorbable material did not significantly affect the anastomotic leak rate but may have reduced anastomotic strictures. Most strictures did not require an anastomotic revision or delay in stoma closure. The bioabsorbable material may positively affect some aspects of the healing of circular stapled colorectal anastomoses; however, additional research on factors associated with anastomotic leakage is needed.