Hospital strategies in commercial episode-based reimbursement.

OBJECTIVES: To understand hospitals' approaches to spending reduction in commercial episode-based payment programs and inform incentive design. STUDY DESIGN: Qualitative arm of an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study involving semistructured interviews with hospital leaders participating in a statewide quality improvement collaborative with novel episode-based incentive payments introduced by the state's largest commercial payer. METHODS: We recruited 21 leaders from 8 purposively selected, diverse hospitals with both high and low performance. Video teleconference-based interviews followed a standardized protocol and addressed 4 domains: choice of clinical condition for evaluation, strategies for episode spending reduction, best practices for success in earning incentives, and barriers to achievement. Rapid qualitative analysis with purposeful data reduction was employed to generate a matrix of key themes within the study domains. RESULTS: Strategies were similar between high- and low-performing hospitals. When selecting conditions, some hospitals focused on areas of underperformance, aiming for improvement opportunities, whereas others chose conditions already achieving highest efficiency. Many tried to synergize with other ongoing improvement initiatives and clinical areas with established leaders and champions. Key strategies included data-driven improvement, care standardization, and protocol dissemination. Best practices for success included readmission prevention and postacute care spending containment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings highlighted hospitals' most common strategies and approaches, providing several insights into optimal design of commercial episode-based incentives: They must be lucrative enough to earn attention or consistent with larger federal programs; hospitals need opportunities to succeed through both improved performance and sustained excellence; and programs may incur malalignment between hospitals and credentialed physicians.

Comparison of outcomes of abdominoperineal resection vs low anterior resection in very-low rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The management of very-low rectal cancer is one of the most challenging issues faced by general and colorectal surgeons. Many feel compelled to pursue abdominoperineal resection (APR) over low anterior resection (LAR) to optimize oncologic outcomes. This study aimed to determine differences in long-term oncologic outcomes between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very-low rectal cancer. METHODS: The United States Rectal Cancer Consortium (2010-2016) was queried for adults who underwent either APR or LAR for stage I-III rectal cancers < 5 cm from anorectal junction and met inclusion criteria. The primary outcome was disease-free survival. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, length of stay, complications, recurrence location, and perioperative factors. RESULTS: A total of 431 patients with very-low rectal cancer who underwent APR or LAR were identified; 154 (35.7%) underwent APR. The overall recurrence rate was 19.6%. The median follow-up was 42.5 months. An analysis adjusted for demographics and pathologic stage observed no difference in disease-free survival between operative types (APR-hazard ratio [HR] = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.53-1.52, P = .70). Secondary outcomes demonstrated no significant difference between operation types, including overall survival (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.71-2.32, P = .39), complications (OR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.94-2.50, P = .12), or length of stay (estimate: 0.04, SE = 0.25, P = .54). CONCLUSION: We observed no significant difference in disease-free survival or overall survival between patients undergoing APR or LAR for very-low rectal cancer. This analysis supports the treatment of very-low rectal cancer, without sphincter involvement, by either APR or LAR.

Association of Surgical Approaches and Outcomes in Total Mesorectal Excision and Margin Status for Rectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Despite being a key metric with a significant correlation with the outcomes of patients with rectal cancer, the optimal surgical approach for total mesorectal excision (TME) has not yet been identified. The aim of this study was to assess the association of the surgical approach on the quality of TME and surgical margins and to characterize the surgical and long-term oncologic outcomes in patients undergoing robotic, laparoscopic, and open TME for rectal cancer. METHODS: Patients with primary, nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent either lower anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection via robotic (Rob), laparoscopic (Lap), or open approaches were selected from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2007-2017). Quasi-Poisson regression analysis with backward selection was used to investigate the relationship between the surgical approach and outcomes of interest. RESULTS: Among the 664 patients included in the study, the distribution of surgical approaches was as follows: 351 (52.9%) underwent TME via the open approach, 159 (23.9%) via the robotic approach, and 154 (23.2%) via the laparoscopic approach. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics among the three cohorts. The laparoscopic cohort had fewer patients with low rectal cancer (<6 cm from the anal verge) than the robotic and open cohorts (Lap 28.6% versus Rob 59.1% versus Open 45.6%, P = 0.015). Patients who underwent Rob and Lap TME had lower intraoperative blood loss compared with the Open approach (Rob 200 mL [Q1, Q3: 100.0, 300.0] versus Lap 150 mL [Q1, Q3: 75.0, 250.0] versus Open 300 mL [Q1, Q3: 150.0, 600.0], P < 0.001). There was no difference in the operative time (Rob 243 min [Q1, Q3: 203.8, 300.2] versus Lap 241 min [Q1, Q3: 186, 336] versus Open 226 min [Q1, Q3: 178, 315.8], P = 0.309) between the three approaches. Postoperative length of stay was shorter with robotic and laparoscopic approach compared to open approach (Rob 5.0 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8.2] versus Lap 5 d [Q1, Q3: 4, 8] versus Open 7.0 d [Q1, Q3: 5, 9], P < 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, and open approaches (79.2%, 64.9%, and 64.7%, respectively; P = 0.46). The margin positivity rate, a composite of circumferential margin and distal margin, was higher with the robotic and open approaches than with the laparoscopic approach (Rob 8.2% versus Open 6.6% versus Lap 1.9%, P = 0.17), Rob versus Lap (odds ratio 0.21; 95% confidence interval 0.05, 0.83) and Rob versus Open (odds ratio 0.5; 95% confidence interval 0.22, 1.12). There was no difference in long-term survival, including overall survival and recurrence-free survival, between patients who underwent robotic, laparoscopic, or open TME (Figure 1). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing surgery with curative intent for rectal cancer, we did not observe a difference in the quality of TME between the robotic, laparoscopic, or open approaches. Robotic and open TME compared to laparoscopic TME were associated with higher margin positivity rates in our study. This was likely due to the higher percentage of low rectal cancers in the robotic and open cohorts. We also reported no significant differences in overall survival and recurrence-free survival between the aforementioned surgical techniques.

Comparison of lumen-apposing metal stents versus endoscopic balloon dilation for the management of benign colorectal anastomotic strictures.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Limited data exist evaluating lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) with endoscopic balloon dilation (EBD) for the treatment of benign colorectal anastomotic strictures (BCASs). This study compares outcomes of both interventions. METHODS: Patients with left-sided BCAS treated with LAMSs versus EBD were identified retrospectively. The primary outcome was a composite of crossover to another intervention to achieve clinical success or recurrence requiring reintervention. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (11 LAMS and 18 EBD) were identified with longer follow-up in the EBD group (734 vs 142 days; P = .003). No significant differences were found in the composite outcome, technical success, clinical success, or components of composite outcome. With LAMS, there was a nonsignificant trend toward fewer procedures (2.4 vs 3.3; P = .06) and adverse events (0% vs 16.7%; P = .26). CONCLUSIONS: LAMS appears to be as effective as EBD for the treatment of BCAS but may require fewer procedures and may be safer than EBD.

Prophylactic defunctioning stomas improve clinical outcomes of anastomotic leak following rectal cancer resections: An analysis of the US Rectal Cancer Consortium.

PURPOSE: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a complication of low anterior resection (LAR) that results in substantial morbidity. There is immense interest in evaluating immediate postoperative and long-term oncologic outcomes in patients who undergo diverting loop ileostomies (DLI). The purpose of this study is to understand the relationship between fecal diversion, AL, and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study using patient data obtained from the US Rectal Cancer Consortium database compiled from six academic institutions. The study population included patients with rectal adenocarcinoma undergoing LAR. The primary outcome was the incidence of AL among patients who did or did not receive DLI during LAR. Secondary outcomes included risk factors for AL, receipt of adjuvant therapy, 3-year overall survival, and 3-year recurrence. RESULTS: Of 815 patients, 38 (4.7%) suffered AL after LAR. Patients with AL were more likely to be male, have unintentional preoperative weight loss, and are less likely to undergo DLI. On multivariable analysis, DLI remained protective against AL (p < 0.001). Diverted patients were less likely to undergo future surgical procedures including additional ostomy creation, completion proctectomy, or pelvic washout for AL. Subgroup analysis of 456 patients with locally advanced disease showed that DLI was correlated with increased receipt of adjuvant therapy for patients with and without AL on univariate analysis (SHR:1.59; [95% CI 1.19-2.14]; p = 0.002), but significance was not met in multivariate models. CONCLUSION: Lack of DLI and preoperative weight loss was associated with anastomotic leak. Fecal diversion may improve the timely initiation of adjuvant oncologic therapy. The long-term outcomes following routine diverting stomas warrant further study.

Association of omental pedicled flap with anastomotic leak following low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Anastomotic leak following colorectal anastomosis adversely impacts short-term, oncologic, and quality-of-life outcomes. This study aimed to assess the impact of omental pedicled flap (OPF) on anastomotic leak among patients undergoing low anastomotic resection (LAR) for rectal cancer using a multi-institutional database. METHODS: Adult rectal cancer patients in the US Rectal Cancer Consortium, who underwent a LAR for stage I-III rectal cancer with or without an OPF were included. Patients with missing data for surgery type and OPF use were excluded from the analysis. The primary outcome was the development of anastomotic leaks. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association. RESULTS: A total of 853 patients met the inclusion criteria and OPF was used in 106 (12.4%) patients. There was no difference in age, sex, or tumor stage of patients who underwent OPF versus those who did not. OPF use was not associated with an anastomotic leak (p = 0.82), or operative blood loss (p = 0.54) but was associated with an increase in the operative duration [ß = 21.42 (95% confidence interval = 1.16, 41.67) p = 0.04]. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing LAR for rectal cancer, OPF use was associated with an increase in operative duration without any impact on the rate of anastomotic leak.

Morphomics-informed population pharmacokinetic and physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling to optimize cefazolin surgical prophylaxis.

INTRODUCTION: Cefazolin is the leading antibiotic used to prevent surgical site infections worldwide. Consensus guidelines recommend adjustment of the cefazolin dose above and below 120 kg without regard to body composition. Algorithms exist to repurpose radiologic data into body composition (morphomics) and inform dosing decisions in obesity. OBJECTIVES: To compare the current standard of body weight to morphomic measurements as covariates of cefazolin pharmacokinetics and aid dose stratification of cefazolin in patients with obesity undergoing colorectal surgery. METHODS: This prospective study measured cefazolin plasma, fat, and colon tissue concentrations in colorectal surgery patients in order to develop a morphomics-informed population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model to guide dose adjustments. A physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was also constructed to inform tissue partitioning in morbidly obese patients (n = 21, body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 with one or more co-morbid conditions). RESULTS: Morphomics and pharmacokinetic data were available in 58 patients with a median [min, max] weight and age of 95.9 [68.5, 148.8] kg and 55 [25, 79] years, respectively. The plasma-to-subcutaneous fat partition coefficient was predicted to be 0.072 and 0.060 by the PopPK and PBPK models, respectively. The estimated creatinine clearance (eCLcr ) and body depth at the third lumbar vertebra (body depth_L3) were identified as covariates of cefazolin exposure. The probability of maintaining subcutaneous fat concentrations above 2 µg/mL for 100% of a 4-h surgical period was below 90% when eCLcr ≥105 mL/min and body depth_L3 ≥ 300 mm and less sensitive to the rate of infusion between 5 and 60 min. CONCLUSIONS: Kidney function and morphomics were more informative than body weight as covariates of cefazolin target site exposure. Data from more diverse populations, consensus on target cefazolin exposure, and comparative studies are needed before a change in practice can be implemented.

Short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy does not increase operative morbidity compared to long-course chemoradiation: A retrospective study of the US rectal cancer consortium.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Neoadjuvant short-course radiation and consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) remains less widely used for rectal cancer in the United States than long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). SC TNT may improve compliance and downstaging; however, a longer radiation-to-surgery interval may worsen pelvic fibrosis and morbidity with total mesorectal excision (TME). A single, US-center retrospective analysis has shown comparable risk of morbidity after neoadjuvant short-course radiation with consolidation chemotherapy (SC TNT) and long-course chemoradiation (LCRT). Validation by a multi-institutional study is needed. METHODS: The US Rectal Cancer Consortium database (2010-2018) was retrospectively reviewed for patients with nonmetastatic, rectal adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant LCRT or SC TNT before TME. The primary endpoint was severe postoperative morbidity. Cohorts were compared by univariate analysis. Multivariable logistic regression modeled the odds of severe complication. RESULTS: Of 788 included patients, 151 (19%) received SC TNT and 637 (81%) LCRT. The SC TNT group had fewer distal tumors (33.8% vs. 50.2%, p < 0.0001) and more clinical node-positive disease (74.2% vs. 47.6%, p < 0.0001). The intraoperative complication rate was similar (SC TNT 5.3% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.65). There was no difference in overall postoperative morbidity (38.4% vs. 46.3%, p = 0.08). Severe morbidity was similar with low anterior resection (9.1% vs. 15.3%, p = 0.10) and abdominoperineal resection (24.4% vs. 29.7%, p = 0.49). SC TNT did not increase the odds of severe morbidity relative to LCRT on multivariable analysis (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.37-1.10). CONCLUSIONS: SC TNT does not increase morbidity after TME for rectal cancer relative to LCRT. Concern for surgical complications should not discourage the use of SC TNT when aiming to increase the likelihood of complete clinical response.

Linking Trauma Registry Patients With Insurance Claims: Creating a Longitudinal Patient Record.

INTRODUCTION: Trauma registries and their quality improvement programs only collect data from the acute hospital admission, and no additional information is captured once the patient is discharged. This lack of long-term data limits these programs' ability to affect change. The goal of this study was to create a longitudinal patient record by linking trauma registry data with third party payer claims data to allow the tracking of these patients after discharge. METHODS: Trauma quality collaborative data (2018-2019) was utilized. Inclusion criteria were patients age ≥18, ISS ≥5 and a length of stay ≥1 d. In-hospital deaths were excluded. A deterministic match was performed with insurance claims records based on the hospital name, date of birth, sex, and dates of service (±1 d). The effect of payer type, ZIP code, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis specificity and exact dates of service on the match rate was analyzed. RESULTS: The overall match rate between these two patient record sources was 27.5%. There was a significantly higher match rate (42.8% versus 6.1%, P < 0.001) for patients with a payer that was contained in the insurance collaborative. In a subanalysis, exact dates of service did not substantially affect this match rate; however, specific International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes (i.e., all 7 characters) reduced this rate by almost half. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated the successful linkage of patient records in a trauma registry with their insurance claims. This will allow us to the collect longitudinal information so that we can follow these patients' long-term outcomes and subsequently improve their care.

Association of bundled payments with spending, utilization, and quality for surgical conditions: A scoping review.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the body of literature examining episode-based bundled payment models effect on health care spending, utilization, and quality of care for surgical conditions. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Episode-based bundled payments were developed as a strategy to lower healthcare spending and improve coordination across phases of healthcare. Surgical conditions may be well-suited targets for bundled payments because they often have defined periods of care and widely variable healthcare spending. In bundled payment models, hospitals receive financial incentives to reduce spending on care provided to patients during a predefined clinical episode. Despite the recent proliferation of bundles for surgical conditions, a collective understanding of their effect is not yet clear. METHODS: A scoping review was conducted, and four databases were queried from inception through September 27, 2021, with search strings for bundled payments and surgery. All studies were screened independently by two authors for inclusion. RESULTS: Our search strategy yielded a total of 879 unique articles of which 222 underwent a full-text review and 28 met final inclusion criteria. Of these studies, most (23 of 28) evaluated the impact of voluntary bundled payments in orthopedic surgery and found that bundled payments are associated with reduced spending on total care episodes, attributed primarily to decreases in post-acute care spending. Despite reduced spending, clinical outcomes (e.g., readmissions, complications, and mortality) were not worsened by participation. Evidence supporting the effects of bundled payments on cost and clinical outcomes in other non-orthopedic surgical conditions remains limited. CONCLUSIONS: Present evaluations of bundled payments primarily focus on orthopedic conditions and demonstrate cost savings without compromising clinical outcomes. Evidence for the effect of bundles on other surgical conditions and implications for quality and access to care remain limited.

Does Anesthesia Quality Improvement Participation Lead to Incremental Savings in a Surgical Quality Collaborative Population? A Retrospective Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: The Anesthesiology Performance Improvement and Reporting Exchange (ASPIRE) Collaborative Quality Initiative (CQI) was launched as a partnership among hospitals to measure quality, review evidence-based practices, and improve anesthesia-related outcomes. Cost savings and improved patient outcomes have been associated with surgical CQI participation, but the impact of an anesthesia CQI on health care cost has not been thoroughly assessed. In this study, we evaluated whether participation in an anesthesia CQI led to health care savings. We hypothesized that ASPIRE participation is associated with reduced total episode payments for payers and major, high-volume procedures included in the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) registry. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, we compared MVC episode payment data from Group 1 ASPIRE hospitals, the first cluster of 8 Michigan hospitals to join ASPIRE in January 2015, to non-ASPIRE matched control hospitals. MVC computes price-standardized, risk-adjusted payments for patients insured by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Preferred Provider Organization, Blue Care Network Health Maintenance Organization, and Medicare Fee-for-Service plans. Episodes from 2014 comprised the pre-ASPIRE time period, and episodes from June 2016 to July 2017 constituted the post-ASPIRE time period. We performed a difference-in-differences analysis to evaluate whether ASPIRE implementation was associated with greater reduction in total episode payments compared to the change in the control hospitals during the same time periods. RESULTS: We found a statistically significant reduction in total episode (-$719; 95% CI [-$1340 to -$97]; P = .023) payments at the 8 ASPIRE hospitals (N = 17,852 cases) compared to the change observed in 8 matched non-ASPIRE hospitals (N = 12,987 cases) for major, high-volume surgeries, including colectomy, colorectal cancer resection, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, hysterectomy, joint replacement (knee and hip), and hip fracture repair. In secondary analyses, 30-day postdischarge (-$354; 95% CI [-$582 to -$126]; P = .002) payments were also significantly reduced in ASPIRE hospitals compared to non-ASPIRE controls. Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction in total episode payments for joint replacements (-$860; 95% CI [-$1222 to -$499]; P < .001) at ASPIRE-participating hospitals. Sensitivity analyses including patient-level covariates also showed consistent results. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in an anesthesiology CQI, ASPIRE, is associated with lower total episode payments for selected major, high-volume procedures. This analysis supports that participation in an anesthesia CQI can lead to reduced health care payments.

Hospital performance in a statewide commercial insurer episode-based incentive program.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate hospital performance and behaviors in the first 2 years of a statewide commercial insurance episode-based incentive pay-for-performance (P4P) program. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of price- and risk-standardized episode-of-care spending from the Michigan Value Collaborative claims data registry. METHODS: Changes in hospital-level episode spending between baseline and performance years were estimated during the program years (PYs) 2018 and 2019. The distribution and hospital characteristics associated with P4P points earned were described for both PYs. A difference-in-differences (DID) analysis compared changes in patient-level episode spending associated with program implementation. RESULTS: Hospital-level episode spending for all conditions declined significantly from the baseline year to the performance year in PY 2018 (-$671; 95% CI, -$1113 to -$230) but was not significantly different for PY 2019 ($177; 95% CI, -$412 to $767). Hospitals earned a mean (SD) total of 6.3 (3.1) of 10 points in PY 2018 and 4.5 (2.9) of 10 points in PY 2019, with few significant differences in P4P points across hospital characteristics. The highest-scoring hospitals were more likely to have changes in case mix index and decreases in spending across the entire episode of care compared with the lowest-scoring hospitals. DID analysis revealed no significant changes in patient-level episode spending associated with program implementation. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence for overall reductions in spending associated with the program, but the performance of the hospitals that achieved greatest savings and incentives provides insights into the ongoing design of hospital P4P metrics.

Close distal margin is associated with locoregional rectal cancer recurrence: A multicenter study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The importance of the radial margin for rectal cancer resection is well understood. However, surgeons have deemphasized the distal margin, accepting very close distal margins to perform sphincter-preserving surgery. We hypothesized that distal margins < 1 cm would be an independent risk factor for locoregional recurrence. The objective was to determine whether close distal margins are associated with increased locoregional recurrence risk. METHODS: This was a multi-institutional retrospective cohort study conducted at six academic medical centers including patients who received low anterior resection surgery for primary rectal cancer between 2007 and 2018. RESULTS: Of 556 low anterior resection patients, the rate of close distal margin was 12.8% (n = 71), and the locoregional recurrence rate was 5.0% (n = 28). The locoregional recurrence rate for close distal margin cases was 9.9% (n = 7) compared to 4.3% (n = 21) for distal margins ≥1.0 cm. In multivariable analysis, the only factor significantly associated with locoregional recurrence was close distal margin (adjusted odds ratio: 2.80, confidence interval: 1.08-7.25, p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer patients with close distal margins (<1 cm) following low anterior resection had a significantly higher risk for locoregional recurrence. Therefore, the decision to perform low anterior resection with margins < 1 cm should be taken with caution.

High Complication Rate After Early Ileostomy Closure: Early Termination of the Short Versus Long Interval to Loop Ileostomy Reversal After Pouch Surgery Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with ulcerative colitis who undergo IPAA, a diverting ileostomy is used to diminish the severity of anastomotic complications. Typically, the ileostomy is closed after an interval of 2 to 4 months. The safety of earlier closure of the ileostomy after pouch surgery is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare postoperative outcomes in patients randomly assigned to early (7-12 days) or late (≥8 weeks) ileostomy closure after ileal pouch construction. DESIGN: This was a multicenter, prospective randomized trial. SETTING: The study was conducted at colorectal surgical units at select United States hospitals. PATIENTS: Adults with ulcerative colitis who underwent 2- or 3-stage proctocolectomy with IPAA were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes included Comprehensive Complication Index at 30 days after ileostomy closure. The secondary outcomes included complications, severe complications, reoperations, and readmissions within 30 days of ileostomy closure. RESULTS: The trial was stopped after interim analysis because of a high rate of complications after early ileostomy closure. Among 36 patients analyzed, 1 patient (3%) had unplanned proctectomy with end-ileostomy. Of the remaining 35 patients, 28 patients (80%) were clinically eligible for early closure and underwent radiologic assessment. There were 3 radiologic failures. Of the 25 remaining patients, 22 patients (88%) were randomly assigned to early closure (n = 10) or late closure (n = 12), and 3 patients were excluded. Median Comprehensive Complication Index was 14.8 (0-54) and 0 (0-23) after early and late closure (p = 0.02). One or more complications occurred in 7 patients (70%) after early closure and in 2 patients (17%) after late closure (p = 0.01)' and complications were severe in 3 patients (30%) after early closure and 0 patients after late closure (p = 0.04). Reoperation was required in 1 patient (10%) and 0 patients (p = 0.26) after early closure and readmission was required in 7 patients (70%) and 1 patient (8%) after late closure (p = 0.003). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by early study closure and selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Early closure of a diverting ileostomy in patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent IPAA is associated with an unacceptably high rate of complications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C68. ALTA TASA DE COMPLICACIONES DESPUS DEL CIERRE PRECOZ DE LA ILEOSTOMA TERMINACIN TEMPRANA DEL ENSAYO ALEATORIZADO DE INTERVALO CORTO VERSUS LARGO PARA LA REVERSIN DE LA ILEOSTOMA EN ASA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA DE RESERVORIO ILEAL: ANTECEDENTES:En los pacientes con colitis ulcerosa que se someten a una anastomosis del reservorio ileoanal, se utiliza una ileostomía de derivación para disminuir la gravedad de las complicaciones de la anastomosis. Por lo general, la ileostomía se cierra después de un intervalo de 2 a 4 meses. Se desconoce la seguridad del cierre más temprano de la ileostomía después de la cirugía de reservorio.OBJETIVO:Comparar los resultados posoperatorios en pacientes asignados al azar al cierre temprano (7-12 días) o tardío (≥ 8 semanas) de la ileostomía después de la construcción de un reservorio ileal.DISEÑO:Este fue un ensayo aleatorizado prospectivo multicéntrico.ESCENARIO:El estudio se realizó en unidades quirúrgicas colorrectales en hospitales seleccionados de los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron adultos con colitis ulcerosa que se sometieron a proctocolectomía en 2 o 3 tiempos con anastomosis ileoanal con reservorio.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados primarios incluyeron el Índice Integral de Complicaciones a los 30 días después del cierre de la ileostomía. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron complicaciones, complicaciones graves, reoperaciones y readmisiones dentro de los 30 días posteriores al cierre de la ileostomía.RESULTADOS:El ensayo se detuvo después del análisis interino debido a una alta tasa de complicaciones después del cierre temprano de la ileostomía. Entre los 36 pacientes analizados, 1 (3%) tuvo una proctectomía no planificada con ileostomía terminal. De los 35 pacientes restantes, 28 (80%) fueron clínicamente elegibles para el cierre temprano y se sometieron a una evaluación radiológica. Hubo 3 fracasos radiológicos. De los 25 pacientes restantes, 22 (88 %) se asignaron al azar a cierre temprano (n = 10) o tardío (n = 12) y 3 fueron excluidos. La mediana del Índice Integral de Complicaciones fue de 14,8 (0-54) y 0 (0-23) después del cierre temprano y tardío (p = 0,02). Una o más complicaciones ocurrieron en 7 pacientes (70%) después del cierre temprano y 2 (17%) pacientes después del cierre tardío (p = 0,01) y fueron graves en 3 (30%) y 0 pacientes, respectivamente (p = 0,04). Requirieron reintervención en 1 (10%) y 0 (p = 0,26) y reingreso en 7 (70%) y 1 (8%) pacientes (p = 0,003).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio estuvo limitado por el cierre temprano del estudio; sesgo de selección.CONCLUSIONES:El cierre temprano de una ileostomía de derivación en pacientes con colitis ulcerosa con anastomosis de reservorio ileoanal se asocia con una tasa inaceptablemente alta de complicaciones. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C68. (Traducción-Dr. Felipe Bellolio).

Impact of Medicare eligibility on informal caregiving for surgery and stroke.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether the intensity of family and friend care changes after older individuals enroll in Medicare at age 65. DATA SOURCES: Health and Retirement Study survey data (1998-2018). STUDY DESIGN: We compared informal care received by patients hospitalized for stroke, heart surgery, or joint surgery and who were stratified into propensity-weighted pre- and post-Medicare eligibility cohorts. A regression discontinuity design compared the self-reported likelihood of any care receipt, weekly hours of overall informal care, and intensity of informal care (hours among those receiving any care) at Medicare eligibility. DATA COLLECTION: Not applicable. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: A total of 2270 individuals were included; 1674 (73.7%) stroke, 240 (10.6%) heart surgery, and 356 (15.7%) joint surgery patients. Mean (SD) care received was 20.0 (42.1) weekly hours. Of the 1214 (53.5%) patients who received informal care, the mean (SD) care receipt was 37.4 (51.7) weekly hours. Mean (SD) overall weekly care received was 23.4 (45.5), 13.9 (35.8), and 7.8 (21.6) for stroke, heart surgery, and joint surgery patients, respectively. The onset of Medicare eligibility was associated with a 13.6 percentage-point decrease in the probability of informal care received for stroke patients (p = 0.003) but not in the other acute care cohorts. Men had a 16.8 percentage-point decrease (p = 0.002) in the probability of any care receipt. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare coverage was associated with a substantial decrease in family and friend caregiving use for stroke patients. Informal care may substitute for rather than complement restorative care, given that Medicare is known to expand the use of postacute care. The observed spillover effect of Medicare coverage on informal caregiving has implications for patient function and caregiver burden and should be considered in episode-based reimbursement models that alter professional rehabilitative care intensity.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following colorectal surgery: a survey of American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgery (ASCRS) member surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with significant morbidity. Evidence from other surgical specialties demonstrate inadequate use of extended VTE prophylaxis following cancer surgery. While guidelines recommend extended VTE prophylaxis for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC), it is unknown to what extent colon and rectal surgeons adhere to these recommendations. METHODS: An 18-question online survey was distributed to all surgeon members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS). The survey was designed to capture knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines. Questions were also designed to elucidate barriers to adopting these guidelines. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 2,316 ASCRS-member surgeons and there were 201 complete responses (8.7% response rate). Most respondents (136/201, 68%) reported that they were familiar with ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines and used them to guide their practice. Extended VTE prophylaxis was reported to be routinely prescribed by the majority of surgeons following CRC resection (109/201, 54%), with an additional 27% reporting selective prescribing (55/201). The most frequently reported reasons for not prescribing extended VTE chemoprophylaxis following CRC resection included patient compliance and insurance/copay issues. CONCLUSION: Most ASCRS-member surgeon respondents reported that they are familiar with ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines, though only 54% surgeons reported routinely prescribing extended VTE prophylaxis following CRC surgery. Patient compliance and insurance issues were identified as the most common barriers. Targeted interventions at the surgeon, patient, and payer level are required to increase the use of extended VTE prophylaxis following CRC resection.

Predictors and Outcomes of Upstaging in Rectal Cancer Patients Who Did Not Receive Preoperative Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative chemoradiation is indicated for clinical stage II and III rectal cancers; however, the accuracy of clinical staging with preoperative imaging is imperfect. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to better characterize the incidence and management of clinical and pathologic stage discordances in patients who did not receive preoperative chemoradiation. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort analysis. SETTINGS: The source of data was the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2015. PATIENTS: We identified patients who underwent resection with curative intent for clinical stage I rectal adenocarcinoma without preoperative chemotherapy or radiation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We evaluated the characteristics of "upstaged" patients-those with T3/T4 tumors found on pathology (pathologic stage II) and/or with positive regional nodes in the resection specimen (pathologic stage III) compared with those patients who were not upstaged (pathologic stage I). We then used a mixed-effects multivariable survival model to compare overall survival between these groups. RESULTS: Among 7818 clinical stage I rectal cancer patients who did not receive preoperative therapy, tumor upstaging occurred in 819 (10.6%) and nodal upstaging occurred in 1612 (20.8%). Upstaged patients were more likely than those not upstaged to have higher grade tumors and positive margins. Survival was worse in upstaged patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.4-1.9) but improved among those upstaged patients who received either chemotherapy (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.6-0.9) or chemoradiation (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.5-0.7). LIMITATIONS: In addition to the inherent limitations of a retrospective cohort study, the National Cancer Database does not record functional outcomes, local recurrence, or disease-specific survival, so we are restricted to the evaluation of overall survival as an oncologic outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate preoperative staging remains a common clinical challenge in the management of rectal cancer. Survival among upstaged patients is improved among those who receive recommended postoperative chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation, yet many patients do not receive guideline-concordant care. See Video Abstract at https://links.lww.com/DCR/B999 . PREDICTORES Y RESULTADOS DE SOBRE ESTADIFICACIN EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO QUE NO RECIBIERON TERAPIA PREOPERATORIA: ANTECEDENTES:La quimio radiación preoperatoria está indicada para los estadios clínicos II y III del cáncer rectal; sin embargo, la precisión de la estadificación clínica con imágenes preoperatorias es imperfecta.OBJETIVO:El objetivo fue mejorar la caracterización de la incidencia y el manejo de la discordancia del estadio clínico y patológico en pacientes que no recibieron quimio radiación preoperatoria.DISEÑO:Este fue un análisis de cohorte retrospectivo.CONFIGURACIÓN:La fuente de datos fue de la Base de datos Nacional del Cáncer entre los años 2006-2015.PACIENTES:Identificamos pacientes que fueron sometidos a resección con intención curativa por adenocarcinoma rectal en estadio clínico I, sin quimioterapia o radiación preoperatoria.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Evaluamos las características de los pacientes "sobre estadificados": aquellos con tumores T3/T4 encontrados en patología (estadio patológico II) y/o con ganglios regionales positivos en la muestra de resección (estadio patológico III), en comparación con aquellos pacientes que no fueron sobre estadificados (estadio patológico I). Luego usamos un modelo de supervivencia multivariable de efectos mixtos para comparar la supervivencia general entre estos grupos.RESULTADOS:De entre 7818 pacientes con cáncer de recto, en estadio clínico I, y que no recibieron tratamiento preoperatorio, se produjo una sobre estadificación tumoral en 819 (10,6%) y una sobre estadificación ganglionar en 1612 (20,8%). Los pacientes sobre estadificados tenían más probabilidades que los no sobre estadificados de tener tumores de mayor grado y márgenes positivos. La supervivencia fue peor en los pacientes sobre estadificados (HR 1,64, IC del 95% [1,4, 1,9]), pero mejoró entre los pacientes sobre estadificados que recibieron quimioterapia (HR 0,71, IC del 95% [0,6, 0,9]) o quimio radiación (HR 0,62, 95% IC [0,5, 0,7]).LIMITACIONES:Además de las limitaciones inherente a un estudio de cohorte de tipo retrospectivo, la Base de datos Nacional del Cáncer no registra resultados funcionales, la recurrencia local o la supervivencia específica de la enfermedad, por lo que estamos restringidos a la evaluación de la supervivencia general como un resultado oncológico.CONCLUSIONES:La estadificación preoperatoria inexacta sigue siendo un desafío clínico común en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto. La supervivencia entre los pacientes con sobre estadificación mejora en aquellos que reciben la quimioterapia y/o quimio radioterapia postoperatoria recomendada, aunque muchos pacientes no reciben atención acorde con las guías. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B999 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

Polygenic Risk Prediction in Diverticulitis.

OBJECTIVE: To derive and validate a polygenic risk score (PRS) to predict the occurrence and severity of diverticulitis and to understand the potential for incorporation of a PRS in current decision-making. BACKGROUND: PRS quantifies genetic variation into a continuous measure of risk. There is a need for improved risk stratification to guide surgical decision-making that could be fulfilled by PRS. It is unknown how surgeons might integrate PRS in decision-making. METHODS: We derived a PRS with 44 single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with diverticular disease in the UK Biobank and validated this score in the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI). We performed a discrete choice experiment of practicing colorectal surgeons. Surgeons rated the influence of clinical factors and a hypothetical polygenic risk prediction tool. RESULTS: Among 2812 MGI participants with diverticular disease, 1964 were asymptomatic, 574 had mild disease, and 274 had severe disease. PRS was associated with occurrence and severity. Patients in the highest PRS decile were more likely to have diverticulitis [odds ratio (OR)=1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.42-2.38)] and more likely to have severe diverticulitis (OR=1.61; 95% CI, 1.04-2.51) than the bottom 50%. Among 213 surveyed surgeons, extreme disease-specific factors had the largest utility (3 episodes in the last year, +74.4; percutaneous drain, + 69.4). Factors with strongest influence against surgery included 1 lifetime episode (-63.3), outpatient management (-54.9), and patient preference (-39.6). PRS was predicted to have high utility (+71). CONCLUSIONS: A PRS derived from a large national biobank was externally validated, and found to be associated with the incidence and severity of diverticulitis. Surgeons have clear guidance at clinical extremes, but demonstrate equipoise in intermediate scenarios. Surgeons are receptive to PRS, which may be most useful in marginal clinical situations. Given the current lack of accurate prognostication in recurrent diverticulitis, PRS may provide a novel approach for improving patient counseling and decision-making.