Laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery in obese patients is technically feasible and oncologically safe. Despite greater postoperative morbidity, obese patients benefit from shorter length of stay. However, a higher conversion rate, particularly for rectal cancers, should be anticipated in obese male patients.

Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is estimated to affect 70% of surgical patients and is associated with adverse clinical outcomes, lengthened hospital stays, and increased costs. To better understand the current level of nursing knowledge on this subject since the release of the "Guideline for prevention of unplanned patient hypothermia," we conducted an e-mail survey of AORN members. The overall response rate was 6.5% (N = 324), and most responding nurses overestimated or underestimated the lower and upper limits for normothermia. When asked about the most common complications associated with hypothermia, respondents identified shivering (68.2%), surgical site infections (65.4%), and cardiac events (61.7%); only 44.8% and 33.6% identified blood loss and pressure injuries, respectively. These results indicate a need for ongoing interventions to increase awareness and promote best practices to prevent and manage inadvertent perioperative hypothermia.

BackgroundSurgical Site Infection (SSI) occurs in 9 % of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Warming and humidifying carbon dioxide (CO2) used for peritoneal insufflation may protect against SSI by avoiding postoperative hypothermia (itself a risk factor for SSI). This study aimed to assess the impact of CO2 conditioning on postoperative hypothermia and SSI and to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis.MethodsA retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection was performed at a single UK specialist centre. The control group (n = 123) received peritoneal insufflation with room temperature, dry CO2, whereas the intervention group (n = 123) received warm, humidified CO2 (using HumiGard™, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare). The outcomes were postoperative hypothermia, SSI and costs. Multivariate analysis was performed.ResultsA total of 246 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 68 (20–87) and mean BMI 28 (15–51). The primary diagnosis was cancer (n = 173), and there were no baseline differences between the groups. CO2 conditioning significantly decreased the incidence of postoperative hypothermia (odds ratio 0.10, 95 % CI 0.04–0.23), with hypothermic patients found to be at increased risk of SSI (odds ratio 4.0, 95 % CI 1.25–12.9). Use of conditioned CO2 significantly decreased the incidence of SSI by 66 % (p = 0.04). The intervention group incurred costs of £155 less per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative.Conclusion CO2 conditioning during laparoscopic colorectal surgery is a safe, feasible and a cost-effective intervention. It improves the quality of surgical care relating to SSI and postoperative hypothermia.

INTRODUCTION The aim of this study was to identify the rate of incisional hernia formation following ileostomy reversal in patients who underwent anterior resection for colorectal cancer. In addition, we aimed to ascertain risk factors for the development of reversal-site incisional hernias and to record the characteristics of the resultant hernias. MATERIALS AND METHODS Using a prospectively compiled database of colorectal cancer patients who were treated with anterior resection, we identified individuals who had undergone both ileostomy formation and subsequent reversal of their ileostomies from January 2005 to December 2014. Medical records were reviewed to record descriptive patient data about risk factors for hernia formation, operative details and any subsequent operations. Computed tomography reports were reviewed to identify the number, site and characteristics of incisional hernias. RESULTS A total of 121 patients were included in this study; 14.9% (n = 18) developed an incisional hernia at the ileostomy reversal site; 17.4% (n = 21) at a non-ileostomy site and 6.6% (n = 8) developed both. The reversal-site hernias were smaller both in width and length compared with the non-ileostomy-site hernias. Risk factors for the development of reversal-site incisional hernias were higher body mass index (BMI), lower age, open surgery, longer reversal time and a history of previous hernias. We did not detect a difference in the size of the incisional hernias that developed in patients with these specific risk factors. CONCLUSIONS Incisional hernias are a significant complication of ileostomy reversal. Further evaluation of the use of prophylactic mesh to reduce the incidence of incisional hernias may be worthwhile.