Should End-of-Life Preferences Be Discussed Routinely before High-Risk Surgery?

Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) is a rare but devastating complication of peritoneal dialysis. It is characterized by peritoneal neovascularization, fibrosis, and calcification ultimately leading to intestinal obstruction and eventual failure. Surgery for EPS has a mortality approaching 50% and most patients require some form of postoperative life-sustaining therapy (LST) during their admission. A 43-year-old gentleman with progressive EPS and significant comorbidities was assessed for enterolysis after a failed first attempt at another center. Because of his comorbidities, postoperative mortality was quoted above 50%. The patient favored surgery to improve his survival and quality of life, but was reluctant to receive prolonged LST in the event of failure of surgical therapy. The surgical team, in conjunction with a palliative care physician, therefore held extensive discussions with the patient and his partner regarding LST and its limitations. Clinical parameters to trigger a transition to palliative care were identified and agreed. Limitations on LST that are directly expressed by patients can represent a contraindication to surgery for many surgeons. Surgical Buy-In is a concept described as a perceived contract, or covenant, between the patient and clinician regarding implied consent for postoperative LST. Currently, preoperative discussions regarding limitations of LST are infrequent, and there can be reticence among patients and surgeons to have these conversations, leading to dissatisfaction on behalf of the patient and their family. After the Montgomery legal ruling, the provision and perception of informed consent are particularly pertinent. The palliative care physician is uniquely placed to contribute to such discussions as part of the surgical multidisciplinary team.