Extended Right-Sided Colon Resection Does Not Reduce the Risk of Colon Cancer Local-Regional Recurrence: Nationwide Population-Based Study From Danish Colorectal Cancer Group Database.

BACKGROUND: It is controversial whether extensive resection of right-sided colon cancer confers oncological benefits. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes of extended surgical removal of the mesocolon compared to the conventional approach. DESIGN: This was a retrospective population-based study. SETTING: Study is based on a prospectively maintained Danish Colorectal Cancer Group database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary outcome measures included local-regional recurrence in patients who underwent curative resection for right-sided colon cancer and 30-day postoperative complications. Distant metastasis, unplanned intraoperative adverse events, and 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality were also investigated. Patients who had palliative or compromised resection, emergency surgery, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy were excluded. RESULTS: Of the 12,855 patients with resection of right-sided colon cancer retrieved, 1151 underwent extended right hemicolectomy. Patients who had extended right hemicolectomy were younger males with lower ASA scores, were operated on by colorectal surgeons using a laparoscopic approach, and had a significantly higher number of harvested lymph nodes. The rate of local-regional recurrence was 1.1% (136/12,855), with no difference between conventional right hemicolectomy and extended right hemicolectomy (OR, 1.7; 95% CI, 0.63-2.18). Postoperative medical complications were significantly higher in extended right hemicolectomy even after adjusting for age, comorbidity, access to the abdomen, and other covariates (OR, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.01-1.58). No significant difference was noticed between conventional right hemicolectomy and extended right hemicolectomy in the rates of distant metastasis, unplanned intraoperative adverse events, and mortality. LIMITATIONS: Because it is a register-based study, underreporting cannot be excluded. Extended right hemicolectomy, as defined in this study, does not reflect the extent of lymphatic dissection performed during the surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This large population-based register study showed no difference in local-regional recurrence of right-sided colon cancer between conventional and extended right hemicolectomy with mesenteric resection and ligation of the middle colic vessels. Extended resection was associated with higher rates of postoperative complications. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B907 . LA RESECCIN AMPLIADA DEL COLON DERECHO NO REDUCE EL RIESGO DE RECURRENCIA LOCALREGIONAL DEL CNCER DE COLON ESTUDIO POBLACIONAL A NIVEL NACIONAL DE LA BASE DE DATOS DEL GRUPO DANS DE CNCER COLORRECTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Es aun un tema controversial si la resección ampliada del cáncer de colon del lado derecho confiere beneficios oncológicos.OBJETIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar los resultados a corto y largo plazo de la resección quirúrgica ampliada del mesocolon en comparación con el enfoque convencional.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio poblacional de tipo retrospectivo basado en una base de datos del Grupo Danés de Cáncer Colorrectal mantenida de manera prospectiva.AJUSTES:La medida de resultado primaria fue la recurrencia local-regional en pacientes sometidos a resección curativa por cáncer de colon del lado derecho y las medidas de resultado secundarias fueron las complicaciones posoperatorias a los 30 días. También fueron investigadas las metástasis a distancia, los eventos adversos intraoperatorios no planificados y la mortalidad posoperatoria a los 30 y 90 días. Se excluyeron los pacientes sometidos a resección paliativa o comprometida, cirugía de urgencia y quimioterapia neoadyuvante.RESULTADOS:De los 12.855 pacientes recuperados y sometidos a resección de cáncer de colon del lado derecho, 1151 fueron sometidos a hemicolectomía derecha ampliada. Los pacientes sometidos a hemicolectomía derecha ampliada fueron varones más jóvenes con puntuaciones ASA más bajas, operados por cirujanos colorrectales, utilizando la vía laparoscópica, y tuvieron un número significativamente mayor de ganglios linfáticos extraídos. La tasa de recidiva local-regional fue del 1,1% (136 / 12.855) sin diferencia entre la hemicolectomía derecha convencional y la hemicolectomía derecha ampliada (OR 1,7 IC 95% 0,63-2,18). Las complicaciones médicas post operatorias fueron significativamente mayores en la hemicolectomía derecha ampliada incluso después del ajuste por edad, comorbilidad, acceso al abdomen y otras covariables (OR 1,26; IC 95% 1,01-1,58). No se observaron diferencias significativas entre la hemicolectomía derecha convencional y la hemicolectomía derecha ampliada con respecto a las tasas de metástasis a distancia, eventos adversos intraoperatorios no planificados y mortalidad.LIMITACIONES:Es un estudio basado en registros, por lo tanto, no se puede excluir la sub notificación. La hemicolectomía derecha ampliada como se define en este estudio no refleja la extensión de la disección linfática realizada durante la cirugía.CONCLUSIONES:Este gran estudio basado en el registro poblacional no mostró diferencias en la recurrencia local-regional del cáncer de colon del lado derecho entre la hemicolectomía derecha convencional y ampliada con resección mesentérica y ligadura de los vasos cólicos medios. La resección ampliada se asoció con tasas más altas de complicaciones posoperatorias. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B907 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto ).

Circumferential Resection Margin After Laparoscopic and Open Rectal Resection: A Nationwide Propensity Score Matched Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies suggest better oncological results after open versus laparoscopic rectal resection for cancer. The external validity of these results has not been tested on a nationwide basis. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify risk factors for positive circumferential resection margin in patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer with special emphasis on surgical approach. DESIGN: This database study was based on the Danish nationwide colorectal cancer database. To identify risk factors for positive circumferential resection margin, we performed uni- and multivariate logistic regression analyses. To assess the role of surgical approach, a propensity score-matched analysis was performed. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at public hospitals across Denmark. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing elective rectal resection from October 2009 through December 2013 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measured was the risk of a positive circumferential resection margin. RESULTS: Included in the final analyses were 2721 cases (745 operated on by an open approach; 1976 by laparoscopy). On direct comparison, positive circumferential resection margin occurred more often after open resection (6.3% vs 4.7%; p = 0.047). After multivariate analyses, tumors located low in the rectum, neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy, increasing T and N stage, tumor fixated in the pelvis, and dissection in the muscularis plane increased the risk of a positive circumferential resection margin. In the propensity score-matched sample (541 exact matched pairs), the laparoscopic approach did not influence the risk of a positive circumferential resection margin (OR, 0.9; 95% CI, 0.6-1.5; p = 0.77). LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data, and thereby contained possible selection bias. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this nationwide database study, and after multivariate and propensity score-matched analyses, there was no increased risk of positive circumferential resection margin after laparoscopic vs open rectal resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A996. MARGEN DE RESECCIÓN CIRCUNFERENCIAL DESPUÉS DE LA RESECCIÓN RECTAL LAPAROSCÓPICA Y ABIERTA: UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE DE PUNTUACIÓN DE PROPENSIÓN A NIVEL NACIONAL: Estudios recientes sugieren mejores resultados oncológicos después de la resección rectal abierta versus laparoscópica. La validez de estos resultados no se ha probado a nivel nacional. OBJETIVO: Identificar los factores de riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo en pacientes sometidos a cirugía por cáncer de recto con especial énfasis en el abordaje quirúrgico. DISEÑO:: Estudio de la base de datos nacional de Dinamarca de cáncer colorrectal. Para identificar los factores de riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo, realizamos análisis de regresión logística uni y multivariable. Para evaluar el papel del abordaje quirúrgico, se realizó un análisis emparejado de puntuación de propensión. AJUSTES: Hospitales públicos en toda Dinamarca. PACIENTES: Pacientes sometidos a resección rectal electiva en el período comprendido entre octubre de 2009 y diciembre de 2013. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS: Riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo. RESULTADOS: 2721 casos (745 operados por abordaje abierto; 1976 por laparoscopia) se incluyeron en el análisis final. En la comparación directa, el margen de resección circunferencial positivo ocurrió más a frecuentemente, después de la resección abierta (6.3 vs 4.7%; p = 0.047). Posterior a los análisis multivariados, tumores localizados en el recto bajo, quimioterapia con radioterapia neoadyuvante, incremento de etapas T y la N, tumor fijo en pelvis y la disección en el plano muscular, aumentaron el riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo. En la muestra emparejada del puntaje de propensión (541 pares coincidentes exactos), el abordaje laparoscópico no influyó en el riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo (razón de probabilidades (IC 95%) 0.9 (0.6-1.5); p = 0.77). LIMITACIONES: Revisión retrospectiva de los datos recopilados prospectivamente y por lo tanto, posible sesgo de selección. CONCLUSIONES: El estudio de la base de datos a nivel nacional y después de los análisis emparejados multivariados y de puntuación de propensión, no hubo un mayor riesgo del margen de resección circunferencial positivo después de la resección laparoscópica versus resección abierta. Vea el Resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/A996.

Risk Factors for Compromised Surgical Resection: A Nationwide Propensity Score-Matched Study on Laparoscopic and Open Resection for Colonic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: High-quality surgical resection of colonic cancer, including dissection along the embryologic mesocolic plane, translates into improved long-term oncological outcomes. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify risk factors for compromised specimen quality and to evaluate the specimen quality of patients undergoing laparoscopic and open resection for colonic cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective observational study. SETTINGS: This database study is based on the prospective national Danish Colorectal Cancer Database including patients undergoing intended curative elective colonic cancer surgery from January 1, 2010 through December 2013. PATIENTS: A total of 5143 patients (1602 open resections; 3541 laparoscopic resections) with colonic cancer were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk factors for poor resection quality were identified through uni- and multivariate logistic regression analysis. The surgical approach was assessed by propensity score-matched regression analysis. Poor resection quality was defined as resections in the muscularis plane accompanied by R0 resection, or resections in any resection plane accompanied by R1 resection. RESULTS: Overall, 4415 (85.8%) of the resections were considered good and 728 (14.2%) were considered poor. After multivariate analysis, neoadjuvant oncological treatment, advanced tumor stage (T3-4), advancing N stage (N1-2), open tumor perforation, and open surgery significantly increased the risk of poor resection quality. In a propensity score-matched sample (n = 1508 matched pairs), matched for age, sex, ASA score, BMI, neoadjuvant treatment, tumor stage, and tumor location, open resection was still associated with a higher risk of poor resection quality compared with laparoscopic resection (OR, 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1-1.8; p = 0.002). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective design was a limitation of this study. CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide propensity score-matched database study, laparoscopic resection was associated with a higher probability of good resection quality compared with open resection for colonic cancer. Risk factors for compromised specimen quality were neoadjuvant oncological treatment, locally advanced tumor stage (T3-4), advanced N stage (N1-2), open tumor perforation, and open surgery. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A830.