Cargando…

Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection

BACKGROUND: End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high‐income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left‐sided colorectal resection. METHODS: This s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6921967/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31891112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50138
_version_ 1783481261605519360
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high‐income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left‐sided colorectal resection. METHODS: This study comprised an analysis of GlobalSurg‐1 and ‐2 international, prospective, observational cohort studies (2014, 2016), including consecutive adult patients undergoing elective or emergency left‐sided colorectal resection within discrete 2‐week windows. Countries were grouped into high‐, middle‐ and low‐income tertiles according to the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Factors associated with colostomy formation versus primary anastomosis were explored using a multilevel, multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: In total, 1635 patients from 242 hospitals in 57 countries undergoing left‐sided colorectal resection were included: 113 (6·9 per cent) from low‐HDI, 254 (15·5 per cent) from middle‐HDI and 1268 (77·6 per cent) from high‐HDI countries. There was a higher proportion of patients with perforated disease (57·5, 40·9 and 35·4 per cent; P < 0·001) and subsequent use of end colostomy (52·2, 24·8 and 18·9 per cent; P < 0·001) in low‐ compared with middle‐ and high‐HDI settings. The association with colostomy use in low‐HDI settings persisted (odds ratio (OR) 3·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·35 to 7·57; P = 0·008) after risk adjustment for malignant disease (OR 2·34, 1·65 to 3·32; P < 0·001), emergency surgery (OR 4·08, 2·73 to 6·10; P < 0·001), time to operation at least 48 h (OR 1·99, 1·28 to 3·09; P = 0·002) and disease perforation (OR 4·00, 2·81 to 5·69; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Global differences existed in the proportion of patients receiving end stomas after left‐sided colorectal resection based on income, which went beyond case mix alone.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6921967
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley & Sons, Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69219672019-12-30 Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection BJS Open Original Articles BACKGROUND: End colostomy rates following colorectal resection vary across institutions in high‐income settings, being influenced by patient, disease, surgeon and system factors. This study aimed to assess global variation in end colostomy rates after left‐sided colorectal resection. METHODS: This study comprised an analysis of GlobalSurg‐1 and ‐2 international, prospective, observational cohort studies (2014, 2016), including consecutive adult patients undergoing elective or emergency left‐sided colorectal resection within discrete 2‐week windows. Countries were grouped into high‐, middle‐ and low‐income tertiles according to the United Nations Human Development Index (HDI). Factors associated with colostomy formation versus primary anastomosis were explored using a multilevel, multivariable logistic regression model. RESULTS: In total, 1635 patients from 242 hospitals in 57 countries undergoing left‐sided colorectal resection were included: 113 (6·9 per cent) from low‐HDI, 254 (15·5 per cent) from middle‐HDI and 1268 (77·6 per cent) from high‐HDI countries. There was a higher proportion of patients with perforated disease (57·5, 40·9 and 35·4 per cent; P < 0·001) and subsequent use of end colostomy (52·2, 24·8 and 18·9 per cent; P < 0·001) in low‐ compared with middle‐ and high‐HDI settings. The association with colostomy use in low‐HDI settings persisted (odds ratio (OR) 3·20, 95 per cent c.i. 1·35 to 7·57; P = 0·008) after risk adjustment for malignant disease (OR 2·34, 1·65 to 3·32; P < 0·001), emergency surgery (OR 4·08, 2·73 to 6·10; P < 0·001), time to operation at least 48 h (OR 1·99, 1·28 to 3·09; P = 0·002) and disease perforation (OR 4·00, 2·81 to 5·69; P < 0·001). CONCLUSION: Global differences existed in the proportion of patients receiving end stomas after left‐sided colorectal resection based on income, which went beyond case mix alone. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2019-02-28 /pmc/articles/PMC6921967/ /pubmed/31891112 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50138 Text en © 2019 The Authors. BJS Open published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of BJS Society Ltd This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title_full Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title_fullStr Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title_full_unstemmed Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title_short Global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
title_sort global variation in anastomosis and end colostomy formation following left‐sided colorectal resection
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6921967/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31891112
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs5.50138
work_keys_str_mv AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection
AT globalvariationinanastomosisandendcolostomyformationfollowingleftsidedcolorectalresection