Background: Transanal dissection of the rectum has been recently introduced for ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) in UC showing promising results. Thanks to the precise identification of the rectotomy site the risk of long rectal stump is avoided, and a single stapled anastomosis is performed easily. The aim of this study is to analyze our initial experience of transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA), considering postoperative complications and medium-term functional outcomes. Methods: Our Center has experienced the transanal approach for proctectomy and IPAA since October 2018. All patients underwent Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. Postoperative complications occurring within 30 days after surgery were taken into consideration. Results: Until March 2019, 8 patients underwent Ta-IPAA. In all cases the laparoscopic approach was performed during the transabdominal phase; abdominal drainage was never used. At the time of the pouch construction a defunctioning ileostomy was created in all patients. Stoma closure was performed in all cases at a median time of 6 months after surgery. Postoperative complications occurred in only one patient, who showed rectal bleeding. There were no cases of anastomotic leakage. Medium-term functional outcomes were determined prospectively by a validated questionnaire (Cleveland Global Quality of Life). Fecal incontinence for liquid or solid stool, restriction in work and social genitourinary and sexual functions were also investigated. Conclusions: In our experience, Ta-IPAA provided good short and medium-term functional results in UC. Background Restorative proctocolectomy is widely adopted in the treatment of ulcerative colitis ,, , as well as in other inflammatory and neoplastic conditions, requiring an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) to reconstruct gastrointestinal continuity to the anus. Conventionally, either the laparoscopic or the open approach can be employed to gain rectal dissection and creation of ileal pouch-anal anastomosis. Pouch-anal anastomosis is usually made using a stapler, leaving a 2 cm rectal cuff in order to preserve continence and to reduce the risk of inflammatory recurrence or dysplasia. The dissection of the last centimeters of the rectum, rectum resection and ileal pouch-anal anastomosis could be demanding from a technical point of view due to narrow pelvic space and cross stapling of the distal part of the rectum is often challenging for surgeons. Transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) has been recently described in rectal cancer treatment, with potential technical and oncologic advantages compared to transabdominal approach. The transanal approach for the proctectomy has been described also in IPAA since 2015, showing feasibility and potential technical advantages; some series ,,, and initial comparative studies have been published , , showing a not increased rate of postoperative morbidity, equivalent quality of life and functional results. The aim of our study is to analyze a single centre experience of transanal IPAA (Ta-IPAA), examining e...

This consensus statement presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of guidelines for the care of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in both adult and pediatric populations. The guidelines are established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of the American Society of Enhanced Recovery and Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia based on a comprehensive search and review of literature up to September 2019. The guidelines provide recommendation on identifying high-risk patients, managing baseline PONV risks, choices for prophylaxis, and rescue treatment of PONV as well as recommendations for the institutional implementation of a PONV protocol. In addition, the current guidelines focus on the evidence for newer drugs (eg, second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 [5-HT3] receptor antagonists, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists, and dopamine antagonists), discussion regarding the use of general multimodal PONV prophylaxis, and PONV management as part of enhanced recovery pathways. This set of guidelines have been endorsed by 23 professional societies and organizations from different disciplines (Appendix 1). What Other Guidelines Are Available on This Topic? Guidelines currently available include the 3 iterations of the consensus guideline we previously published, which was last updated 6 years ago 1–3 ; a guideline published by American Society of Health System Pharmacists in 1999 4 ; a brief discussion on PONV management as part of a comprehensive postoperative care guidelines 5 ; focused guidelines published by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, 6 the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland 7 and the Association of Perianesthesia Nursing 8 ; and several guidelines published in other languages. 9–12 Why Was This Guideline Developed? The current guideline was developed to provide perioperative practitioners with a comprehensive and up-to-date, evidence-based guidance on the risk stratification, prevention, and treatment of PONV in both adults and children. The guideline also provides guidance on the management of PONV within enhanced recovery pathways. How Does This Guideline Differ From Existing Guidelines? The previous consensus guideline was published 6 years ago with a literature search updated to October 2011. Several guidelines, which have been published since, are either limited to a specific populations 7 or do not address all aspects of PONV management. 13 The current guideline was developed based on a systematic review of the literature published up through September 2019. This includes recent studies of newer pharmacological agents such as the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, a dopamine antagonist, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists as well as several novel combination therapies. In addition, it also contains an evidence-based discussion on the management of PONV in enhanced recovery pathways. We have also discussed the implementation of a general multimodal PONV prophylaxis in all at-risk surgical patients based on the consensus of the expert panel.

Objective The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society (TOS), American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS), Obesity Medicine Association (OMA), and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity‐based chronic disease complications‐centric model, nuance‐based and algorithm/checklist‐assisted clinical decision‐making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusions Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher‐risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision‐making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues.

International hospitals and healthcare facilities face catastrophic financial challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic. The American Hospital Association estimates a financial impact of $202.6 billion in lost revenue for America's hospitals and health systems, or an average of $50.7 billion per month. Furthermore, it could cost low- and middle-income countries ∼ US$52 billion (equivalent to US$8.60 per person) each four weeks to provide an effective health-care response to COVID-19. In the setting of the largest daily COVID-19 new cases in the US, this burden will influence patient care, surgeries, and surgical outcomes. From a global economic standpoint, The World Bank projects that global growth is projected to shrink by almost 8% with poorer countries feeling most of the impact, and the United Nations projects that it will cost the global economy around 2 trillion dollars this year. Overall, a lack of preparedness was a major contributor to the struggles experienced by healthcare facilities around the world. Items such as personal protective equipment (PPE) for healthcare workers, hospital equipment, sanitizing supplies, toilet paper, and water were in short supply. These deficiencies were exposed by COVID-19 and have prompted healthcare organizations around the world to invent new essential plans for pandemic preparedness. In this paper we will discuss the economic impact of COVID on US and international hospitals, healthcare facilities, surgery, and surgical outcomes. In the future the US and countries around the world will benefit from preparing a plan of action to use as a guide in the event of a disaster or pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-related adverse events are a serious problem in hospitalized patients. Little is known about patients who are likely to experience opioid-induced respiratory depression events on the general care floor and may benefit from improved monitoring and early intervention. The trial objective was to derive and validate a risk prediction tool for respiratory depression in patients receiving opioids, as detected by continuous pulse oximetry and capnography monitoring. METHODS: PRediction of Opioid-induced respiratory Depression In patients monitored by capnoGraphY (PRODIGY) was a prospective, observational trial of blinded continuous capnography and oximetry conducted at 16 sites in the United States, Europe, and Asia. Vital signs were intermittently monitored per standard of care. A total of 1335 patients receiving parenteral opioids and continuously monitored on the general care floor were included in the analysis. A respiratory depression episode was defined as respiratory rate ≤5 breaths/min (bpm), oxygen saturation ≤85%, or end-tidal carbon dioxide ≤15 or ≥60 mm Hg for ≥3 minutes; apnea episode lasting >30 seconds; or any respiratory opioid-related adverse event. A risk prediction tool was derived using a multivariable logistic regression model of 46 a priori defined risk factors with stepwise selection and was internally validated by bootstrapping. RESULTS: One or more respiratory depression episodes were detected in 614 (46%) of 1335 general care floor patients (43% male; mean age, 58 ± 14 years) continuously monitored for a median of 24 hours (interquartile range [IQR], 17–26). A multivariable respiratory depression prediction model with area under the curve of 0.740 was developed using 5 independent variables: age ≥60 (in decades), sex, opioid naivety, sleep disorders, and chronic heart failure. The PRODIGY risk prediction tool showed significant separation between patients with and without respiratory depression ( P < .001) and an odds ratio of 6.07 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.44–8.30; P < .001) between the high- and low-risk groups. Compared to patients without respiratory depression episodes, mean hospital length of stay was 3 days longer in patients with ≥1 respiratory depression episode (10.5 ± 10.8 vs 7.7 ± 7.8 days; P < .0001) identified using continuous oximetry and capnography monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: A PRODIGY risk prediction model, derived from continuous oximetry and capnography, accurately predicts respiratory depression episodes in patients receiving opioids on the general care floor. Implementation of the PRODIGY score to determine the need for continuous monitoring may be a first step to reduce the incidence and consequences of respiratory compromise in patients receiving opioids on the general care floor.

No abstract

Objective: The development of these updated clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) was commissioned by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), The Obesity Society, American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Boards of Directors in adherence with the AACE 2017 protocol for standardized production of CPGs, algorithms, and checklists. Methods: Each recommendation was evaluated and updated based on new evidence from 2013 to the present and subjective factors provided by experts. Results: New or updated topics in this CPG include: contextualization in an adiposity-based chronic disease complications-centric model, nuance-based and algorithm/checklist-assisted clinical decision-making about procedure selection, novel bariatric procedures, enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery protocols, and logistical concerns (including cost factors) in the current health-care arena. There are 85 numbered recommendations that have updated supporting evidence, of which 61 are revised and 12 are new. Noting that there can be multiple recommendation statements within a single numbered recommendation, there are 31 (13%) Grade A, 42 (17%) Grade B, 72 (29%) Grade C, and 101 (41%) Grade D recommendations. There are 858 citations, of which 81 (9.4%) are evidence level (EL) 1 (highest), 562 (65.5%) are EL 2, 72 (8.4%) are EL 3, and 143 (16.7%) are EL 4 (lowest). Conclusion: Bariatric procedures remain a safe and effective intervention for higher-risk patients with obesity. Clinical decision-making should be evidence based within the context of a chronic disease. A team approach to perioperative care is mandatory, with special attention to nutritional and metabolic issues. Abbreviations: A1C = hemoglobin A1c; AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ABCD = adiposity-based chronic disease; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; ADA = American Diabetes Association; AHI = Apnea-Hypopnea Index; ASA = American Society of Anesthesiologists; ASMBS = American Society of Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery; BMI = body mass index; BPD = biliopancreatic diversion; BPD/DS = biliopancreatic diversion with duodenal switch; CI = confidence interval; CPAP = continuous positive airway pressure; CPG = clinical practice guideline; CRP = C-reactive protein; CT = computed tomography; CVD = cardiovascular disease; DBCD = dysglycemia-based chronic disease; DS = duodenal switch; DVT = deep venous thrombosis; DXA = dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry; EFA = essential fatty acid; EL = evidence level; EN = enteral nutrition; ERABS = enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery; FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration; G4GAC = Guidelines for Guidelines, Algorithms, and Checklists GERD = gastroesophageal reflux disease; GI = gastrointestinal; HCP = health-care professional(s); HTN = hypertension; ICU = intensive care unit; IGB = intragastric balloon(s); IV = intravenous; LAGB = laparoscopic adjustable gastric band; LAGBP = laparoscopic adjustable gastric banded plication; LGP = laparoscopic greater curvature (gastric) plication; LRYGB = laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; LSG = laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy; MetS = metabolic syndrome; NAFLD = nonalcoholic fatty liver disease; NASH = nonalcoholic steatohepatitis; NSAID = nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug; OA = osteoarthritis; OAGB = one-anastomosis gastric bypass; OMA = Obesity Medicine Association; OR = odds ratio; ORC = obesity-related complication(s); OSA = obstructive sleep apnea; PE = pulmonary embolism; PN = parenteral nutrition; PRM = pulmonary recruitment maneuver; RCT = randomized controlled trial; RD = registered dietician; RDA = recommended daily allowance; RYGB = Roux-en-Y gastric bypass; SG = sleeve gastrectomy; SIBO = small intestinal bacterial overgrowth; TOS = The Obesity Society; TSH = thyroid-stimulating hormone; T1D = type 1 diabetes; T2D = type 2 diabetes; VTE = venous thromboembolism; WE = Wernicke encephalopathy; WHO = World Health Organization

No abstract