External validation of the Codman score in colorectal surgery: a pragmatic tool to drive quality improvement.

AIM: The simple six-variable Codman score is a tool designed to reduce the complexity of contemporary risk-adjusted postoperative mortality rate predictions. We sought to externally validate the Codman score in colorectal surgery. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) participant user file and colectomy targeted dataset of 2020 were merged. A Codman score (composed of six variables: age, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, emergency status, degree of sepsis, functional status and preoperative blood transfusion) was assigned to every patient. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality and secondary outcome was morbidity at 30 days. Logistic regression analyses were performed using the Codman score and the ACS NSQIP mortality and morbidity algorithms as independent variables for the primary and secondary outcomes. The predictive performance of discrimination area under receiver operating curve (AUC) and calibration of the Codman score and these algorithms were compared. RESULTS: A total of 40 589 patients were included and a Codman score was generated for 40 557 (99.02%) patients. The median Codman score was 3 (interquartile range 1-4). To predict mortality, the Codman score had an AUC of 0.92 (95% CI 0.91-0.93) compared to the NSQIP mortality score 0.93 (95% CI 0.92-0.94). To predict morbidity, the Codman score had an AUC of 0.68 (95% CI 0.66-0.68) compared to the NSQIP morbidity score 0.72 (95% CI 0.71-0.73). When body mass index and surgical approach was added to the Codman score, the performance was no different to the NSQIP morbidity score. The calibration of observed versus expected predictions was almost perfect for both the morbidity and mortality NSQIP predictions, and only well fitted for Codman scores of less than 4 and greater than 7. CONCLUSION: We propose that the six-variable Codman score is an efficient and actionable method for generating validated risk-adjusted outcome predictions and comparative benchmarks to drive quality improvement in colorectal surgery.

Evaluation of Financial Relationships Between US Colorectal Surgery Fellowship Program Directors and Industry.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the financial relationships between colorectal surgery fellowship program directors and industry.

Precision cut intestinal slices, a novel model of acute food allergic reactions.

BACKGROUND: Food allergy affects up to 10% of the pediatric population. Despite ongoing efforts, treatment options remain limited. Novel models of food allergy are needed to study response patterns downstream of IgE-crosslinking and evaluate drugs modifying acute events. Here, we report a novel human ex vivo model that displays acute, allergen-specific, IgE-mediated smooth muscle contractions using precision cut intestinal slices (PCIS). METHODS: PCIS were generated using gut tissue samples from children who underwent clinically indicated surgery. Viability and metabolic activity were assessed from 0 to 24 h. Distribution of relevant cell subsets was confirmed using single nucleus RNA sequencing. PCIS were passively sensitized using plasma from peanut allergic donors or peanut-sensitized non-allergic donors, and exposed to various stimuli including serotonin, histamine, FcɛRI-crosslinker, and food allergens. Smooth muscle contractions and mediator release functioned as readouts. A novel program designed to measure contractions was developed to quantify responses. The ability to demonstrate the impact of antihistamines and immunomodulation from peanut oral immunotherapy (OIT) was assessed. RESULTS: PCIS viability was maintained for 24 h. Cellular distribution confirmed the presence of key cell subsets including mast cells. The video analysis tool reliably quantified responses to different stimulatory conditions. Smooth muscle contractions were allergen-specific and reflected the clinical phenotype of the plasma donor. Tryptase measurement confirmed IgE-dependent mast cell-derived mediator release. Antihistamines suppressed histamine-induced contraction and plasma from successful peanut OIT suppressed peanut-specific PCIS contraction. CONCLUSION: PCIS represent a novel human tissue-based model to study acute, IgE-mediated food allergy and pharmaceutical impacts on allergic responses in the gut.

Post-operative outcomes in patients with locally advanced colon cancer: a comparison of operative approach.

INTRODUCTION: Surgeons may choose an open approach to locally advanced colon cancer (LACC) because of the elevated conversion rate (minimally invasive to open) in these patients (resulting in part from a judgment of the technical feasibility of a minimally invasive approach). Poorer outcomes have been suggested in those requiring conversion from a minimal access to an open approach; however, the influence of conversion has not been studied in LACC. We sought to compare perioperative outcomes in patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing minimally invasive surgery (MIS), planned open (PO), and converted (CN) procedures to evaluate the influence of conversion in this subgroup. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the NSQIP database. Patients with T4aN2 colon cancer undergoing elective resection were included; rectal/unknown tumor location, and T4b disease were excluded (to ensure homogeneity in surgical management). Patients were divided into cohorts based on approach: PO, MIS, and CN. Summary statistics were compared between groups. Multivariable analysis was conducted for mortality and morbidity outcomes. RESULTS: 1286 cases were included (313 PO, 842 MIS, 131 CN); 10.2% underwent conversion. Those undergoing MIS had a shorter length of stay than those undergoing PO or CN (p < 0.0001). On univariable analysis, CN resulted in increased rates of any complication (p < 0.0001). CN also had a greater rate of anastomotic leak (p = 0.0046) and death (p = 0.05). On multivariable analysis, significant predictors of any complication included age, ASA class, M stage, and approach; however, CN did not increase the risk of complication compared with MIS, whereas PO nearly doubled the risk of complication (OR = 1.98, p = 0.0083). The only significant predictor of mortality on multivariable analysis was age (HR = 1.09, p = 0.0002)-approach was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSION: PO confers the greatest risk of suffering any complication. Surgical approach was not associated with death. Results of our study challenge the notion that conversion is associated with the worst perioperative outcomes and an MIS approach should be considered in patients with LACC.

Anal Adenocarcinoma: A Rare Entity in Need of Multidisciplinary Management.

BACKGROUND: Anal adenocarcinoma is a rare clinical entity for which the optimal management is not defined. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the multidisciplinary management and outcomes of patients with anal adenocarcinoma. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING: This study was conducted at a quaternary cancer center. PATIENTS: Men and women with anal adenocarcinoma treated between 1995 and 2016 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Fifty-two patients were treated with either chemoradiotherapy or trimodality therapy including radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and surgical resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local failure, regional failure, and distant metastasis rates were estimated using the cumulative incidence method. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression-free survival and overall survival. The multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the clinical predictors of outcome. RESULTS: There was a higher 5-year rate of local failure in patients treated with chemoradiotherapy compared with trimodality therapy (53% vs 10%; p < 0.01). The 5-year incidence of distant metastases was 29% (trimodality therapy) versus 30% (chemoradiotherapy; p = 0.9); adjuvant chemotherapy did not reduce the incidence of distant metastases (p = 0.8). Five-year overall survival was 73% (trimodality therapy) versus 49.4% (chemoradiotherapy; p = 0.1). On multivariable analysis, factors associated with worse overall survival were treatment with chemoradiotherapy, cT3-4 category disease, and node-positive disease. LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its small sample size and retrospective nature. CONCLUSIONS: Although treatment may continue to be tailored to individual patients, better outcomes with a trimodality therapy approach were observed. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B708.ADENOCARCINOMA ANAL: UNA ENTIDAD POCO FRECUENTE EN NECESIDAD DE UN MANEJO MULTIDISCIPLINARIO. ANTECEDENTES: El adenocarcinoma anal es una entidad clínica poco frecuente por lo que aún no se define el manejo óptimo. OBJETIVO: Describir el manejo multidisciplinario y los resultados de los pacientes con adenocarcinoma anal. DISEO: Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo. ENTORNO CLINICO: Centro de cáncer cuaternario. PACIENTES: Hombres y mujeres con adenocarcinoma anal tratados entre 1995 y 2016. INTERVENCIONES: Cincuenta y dos pacientes fueron tratados con quimiorradioterapia o terapia trimodal que incluyó: radioterapia, quimioterapia y resección quirúrgica. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION: Se estimaron las tasas de falla local, falla regional y metástasis a distancia mediante el método de incidencia acumulada. Se utilizó el método de Kaplan-Meier para estimar la supervivencia libre de progresión y la supervivencia global. Los riesgos proporcionales de multivariable Cox se utilizaron para evaluar los predictores clínicos de los resultados. RESULTADOS: Hubo una mayor tasa de falla local a cinco años en pacientes tratados con quimiorradioterapia en comparación con terapia trimodal (53% vs 10%; p < 0,01). La incidencia a cinco años de metástasis a distancia fue del 29% (terapia trimodal) versus 30% (quimiorradioterapia) (p = 0,9); la quimioterapia adyuvante no redujo la incidencia de metástasis a distancia (p = 0,8). La supervivencia global a cinco años fue del 73% (terapia trimodal) versus 49,4% (quimiorradioterapia); p = 0,1. En el análisis multivariable, los factores asociados con una peor supervivencia general fueron el tratamiento con quimiorradioterapia, enfermedad de categoría cT3-4 y enfermedad con ganglios positivos. LIMITACIONES: Este estudio está limitado por su pequeño tamaño de muestra y su naturaleza retrospectiva. CONCLUSIONES: Aunque el tratamiento puede seguir adaptándose a pacientes individuales, se observaron mejores resultados con un enfoque TTM. Conslute Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B708. (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon).

Racial disparities in colon cancer survival: A propensity score matched analysis in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Black patients are disproportionally impacted by colorectal cancer, both with respect to incidence and mortality. Studies accounting for patient- and community-level factors that contribute to such disparities are lacking. Our objective is to determine if Black compared to White race is associated with worse survival in colon cancer, while accounting for socioeconomic and clinical factors. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of Black or White patients with nonmetastatic colon cancer in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry between 2008 and 2016. Multivariable Cox regression analysis and propensity-score matching was performed. RESULTS: A total of 100,083 patients were identified, 15,155 Black patients and 84,928 White patients. Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range: 15-67). Black patients were more likely to lack health insurance and reside in counties with low household income, high unemployment, and lower high school completion rates. Black race was associated with poorer unadjusted 5-year cancer-specific survival (79.4% vs 82.4%, P < .001). After multivariable adjustment, Black race was associated with greater 5-year cancer-specific mortality (hazard ratio: 1.19, 95% confidence interval: 1.13-1.25, P < .001) and overall mortality (hazard ratio: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.16, P < .001). Mortality was higher for Black patients across stages: stage I (hazard ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.09), stage II (hazard ratio: 1.06, 95% confidence interval: 1.06-1.07), stage III (1.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.04). Propensity-score matching identified 27,640 patients; Black race was associated with worse 5-year overall survival (67.5% vs 70.2%, P = .003) and cancer-specific survival (79.4% vs 82.3%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This US population-based analysis confirms poorer overall survival and cancer-specific survival in Black patients undergoing surgery for nonmetastatic colon cancer despite accounting for trans-sectoral factors that have been implicated in structural racism.

Impact of BMI on Adverse Events After Laparoscopic and Open Surgery for Rectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: The impact of body mass index (BMI) on outcomes after open or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer remains unclear. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to examine the interaction of body mass index and surgical modality (i.e., laparoscopy versus open) with respect to short-term clinical outcomes in patients with rectal cancer. METHODS: The ACS-NSQIP database (2012-2016) was reviewed for patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause morbidity. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 16,145 patients were grouped into open (N = 6759, 42%) and laparoscopic (N  = 9386, 58%) cohorts. Patients with higher BMI (p < 0.001) and those undergoing open surgery (p < 0.001) were at increased risk of all-cause morbidity. There was no significant change in the odds ratio of experiencing all-cause morbidity between open and laparoscopic surgery with increasing BMI (p = 0.572). Median length of stay was significantly shorter in the laparoscopy group (4 days vs. 6 days; p < 0.001), at the cost of increased operative time (239 min vs. 210 min, p < 0.001). The difference in operative time between laparoscopy and open surgery did not increase with rising BMI (i.e., ∆37 min vs. ∆39 min at BMI 25 kg/m2 vs 50 kg/m2, respectively, p = 0.491). CONCLUSION: BMI may not be a strong modifier for surgical approach with respect to short-term clinical outcomes in patients with obesity and rectal cancer. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with improved short-term clinical outcomes, without much change in the absolute difference in operative time compared with open surgery, even at higher BMIs.

Anastomotic leak after colorectal surgery: does timing affect failure to rescue?

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leak (AL) is a common complication after colectomy with a relatively high failure to rescue rate (FTR), or death after major complications. There is emerging evidence to suggest an early AL may be associated with increased technical difficulty. Whether the timing of an AL is associated with higher FTR has not been established. METHODS: Patients who underwent a colectomy between 2012 and 2017 were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP database). The primary outcome was FTR after AL. The predictor variable used was day of post-operative leak (POD) categorized into early (POD ≤ 3), intermediate (3 < POD ≤ 20) and late (20 < POD ≤ 30) AL. These POD groups were compared to generate hypotheses to explain any association observed between timing of AL and FTR. RESULTS: Of 135,539 identified patients, 4613 patients experienced an AL (3.4%) with an overall FTR of 6.4%. FTR differed by timing of AL: early AL was found to have a FTR of 28/195 (12.6%), with a FTR in intermediate AL of 152/2550 (5.6%) and 3/356 (0.8%) in late AL patients (p < 0.0001). When compared by timing of AL, patients differed by sex, pre-operative bowel preparation, de-functioning ostomy rates and re-operation rates (p < 0.05). Controlling for age, ASA, sex, emergency status, operative approach, indication, de-functioning ostomy, re-operation and concurrent procedure, an early AL was found to have a 2.3-fold increased risk of FTR (95% CI 1.38-3.84, p = 0.001), with a late AL having a 0.15-fold decreased risk (95% CI 0.04-0.49, p = 0.002), both compared to an intermediate AL. CONCLUSION: Early ALs, occurring within three days of surgery, may carry a significant risk of FTR. Given the findings identified here, this may support the use of early detection algorithms and interventions of AL to minimize the risk of FTR.

Starting late does not increase the risk of post-operative complications in patients undergoing common general surgical procedures.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of evidence surrounding the issue of delays on the day of surgery with respect to both causes and consequences. We sought to determine whether patients whose operations started late were at increased risk of post-operative complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 1420 first-of-the-day common general surgical procedures, dividing these into "on-time start" (OTS) and "late-start" (LS) cases. Our primary outcomes were minor and major complication rate; our secondary objective was to identify factors predicting LS. Groups were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis. RESULTS: LS rate was 55.3%. On univariable analysis, LS had higher rates of major and minor complications (7.3% vs. 3.5%, p = 0.002; 3.8% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.011). On multivariable analysis, LS was not associated with increased odds of any complications. Minor complications were predicted by operative duration [OR = 1.005 (1.002-1.008)], female sex [OR = 1.78 (1.037-3.061)], and undergoing an ileostomy closure procedure [OR = 10.60 (2.791-40.246)], and were reduced in those undergoing surgery on Wednesdays [OR = 0.38 (0.166-0.876)]. Major complications were predicted by operative duration [OR = 1.007 (1.003-1.011)] and ASA class [OR = 6.73 (1.505-30.109)]. Multivariable analysis using LS as an outcome identified that anesthesia time [OR = 1.35 (1.031-1.403)], insulin-dependent diabetes [OR = 1.91 (1.128-3.246)], and dyspnea upon moderate exertion [OR = 2.52 (1.423-4.522)] were predictive of LS. CONCLUSIONS: Most cases in our study started late. While this has significant efficiency and economic costs, it is not associated with adverse patient outcomes. This topic remains incompletely described. Further research is needed to improve efficiency and patient experience by investigating the causes of operative delays.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus direct to surgery for T4 colon cancer: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Despite persistently poor oncological outcomes, approaches to the management of T4 colonic cancer remain variable, with the role of neoadjuvant therapy unclear. The aim of this review was to compare oncological outcomes between direct-to-surgery and neoadjuvant therapy approaches to T4 colon cancer. METHODS: A librarian-led systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to 11 February 2020 was performed. Inclusion criteria were primary research articles comparing oncological outcomes between neoadjuvant therapies or direct to surgery for primary T4 colonic cancer. Based on PRISMA guidelines, screening and data abstraction were undertaken in duplicate. Quality assessment was carried out using Cochrane risk-of-bias tools. Random-effects models were used to pool effect estimates. This study compared pathological resection margins, postoperative morbidity, and oncological outcomes of cancer recurrence and overall survival. RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 43 063 patients met the inclusion criteria. Compared with direct to surgery, neoadjuvant therapy was associated with increased rates of margin-negative resection (odds ratio (OR) 2.60, 95 per cent c.i. 1.12 to 6.02; n = 15 487) and 5-year overall survival (pooled hazard ratio 1.42, 1.10 to 1.82, I2 = 0 per cent; n = 15 338). No difference was observed in rates of cancer recurrence (OR 0.42, 0.15 to 1.22; n = 131), 30-day minor (OR 1.12, 0.68 to 1.84; n = 15 488) or major (OR 0.62, 0.27 to 1.44; n = 15 488) morbidity, or rates of treatment-related adverse effects. CONCLUSION: Compared with direct to surgery, neoadjuvant therapy improves margin-negative resection rates and overall survival.

Apical lymphadenectomy during low ligation of the IMA during rectosigmoid resection for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Low ligation of the inferior mesenteric artery with preservation of the left colic artery may decrease the risk of colorectal anastomotic ischemia compared to high ligation at its origin. Low ligation leaves apical nodes in situ and is therefore paired with apical lymphadenectomy. We sought to compare relevant oncologic outcomes between high ligation and low ligation plus apical lymphadenectomy in rectosigmoid resection for colorectal cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study. Patients receiving a rectosigmoid resection for cancer between January 2012 and July 2018 were included. Patients with metastatic disease and those who underwent low ligation without apical lymphadenectomy were excluded. Our primary outcome was nodal yield/metastasis. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications, local recurrence, and overall survival. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients underwent high ligation and 89 low ligation plus apical lymphadenectomy (median follow-up 20 months). In the low-ligation group, a median of 2 (interquartile range = 1-3) apical nodes was resected; 4.1% were malignant, increasing pathologic stage in 25% of these patients. There were no differences in nodal yield, complications, anastomotic leak, local recurrence, or overall survival. CONCLUSION: No differences were identified between high ligation and low ligation plus apical lymphadenectomy with respect to relevant clinical outcomes. Prospective trial data are needed to robustly establish the oncologic benefit and safety of the low ligation plus apical lymphadenectomy technique.

Interventions and Outcomes for Neoadjuvant Treatment of T4 Colon Cancer: A Scoping Review.

While adjuvant treatment of colon cancers that penetrate the serosa (T4) have been well-established, neoadjuvant strategies have yet to be formally evaluated. Our objective was to perform a scoping review of eligibility criteria, treatment regimens, and primary outcomes for neoadjuvant approaches to T4 colon cancer. A librarian-led, systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and CINAHL up to 11 February 2020 was performed. Primary research evaluating neoadjuvant treatment in T4 colon cancer were included. Screening and data abstraction were performed in duplicate; analyses were descriptive or thematic. A total of twenty studies were included, most of which were single-arm, single-center, and retrospective. The primary objectives of the literature to date has been to evaluate treatment feasibility, tumor response, disease-free survival, and overall survival in healthy patients. Conventional XELOX and FOLFOX chemotherapy were the most commonly administered interventions. Rationale for selecting a specific regimen and for treatment eligibility criteria were poorly documented across studies. The current literature on neoadjuvant strategies for T4 colon cancer is overrepresented by single-center, retrospective studies that evaluate treatment feasibility and efficacy in healthy patients. Future studies should prioritize evaluating clear selection criteria and rationale for specific neoadjuvant strategies. Validation of outcomes in multi-center, randomized trials for XELOX and FOLFOX have the most to contribute to the growing evidence for this poorly managed disease.

Long-term outcomes of resection for locoregional recurrence of colon cancer: A retrospective descriptive cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Resection for isolated distant recurrence of colon cancer is well accepted. Resection for locoregionally recurrent colon cancer (LRCC) is not well studied. We evaluated the long-term outcomes of curative-intent resection for LRCC. METHODS: All patients undergoing curative-intent resection for LRCC at three specialized cancer centers affiliated with the University of Toronto were identified (1993-2017). Follow-up included serial clinical assessment, colonoscopy, CEA, and cross-sectional imaging. Overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and time to re-recurrence were estimated using Kaplan-Meier method and cumulative incidence function. The association between resection margins and outcome was assessed with Cox models. RESULTS: 117 patients were included in the study cohort. Median follow-up was 53 months (IQR: 34-101). OS was 75% (95% CI: 68-84) at 5 years, and 69% (95% CI: 59-79) at 10 years. CSS was 78% (95% CI: 70-86) at 5 years and 72% (95% CI: 63-83) at 10 years. The rate of re-recurrence was 22% (95% CI: 14-31) at 5 years, and 27% (95% CI: 16-39) at 10 years. Negative resection margin (R0) was associated with improved OS (HR 3.33, 95% CI: 1.85-6.00, p < 0.01). There were no postoperative deaths; complications with Clavien-Dindo grade > II occurred in 12% of patients. Perioperative chemotherapy was used in 63% of patients and radiotherapy in 37%. CONCLUSION: In selected patients with LRCC, excellent OS, CSS and low re-recurrence rates were observed, and R0 resection predicted better outcomes. These findings support consideration of resection for LRCC in fit patients after review at a multidisciplinary cancer conference.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Approaches Are Safe and Appropriate in N2 Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: There is emerging evidence of the oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery in T4 colorectal cancer; however, such support is lacking in N2 disease. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare oncological and perioperative outcomes of surgical resection for N2 colorectal cancer using an open versus minimally invasive approach. DESIGN: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's generic and targeted colectomy data sets. SETTINGS: Data about surgery for N2 colorectal cancer were obtained regarding North American hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. PATIENTS: All patients undergoing elective surgical resection for N2 colorectal cancer in participating hospitals between 2014 and 2018 were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Surgical resection of N2 colorectal cancer was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Our primary outcome was nodal yield. Secondary outcomes included perioperative complications and mortality. RESULTS: A total of 1837 patients underwent open and 3907 patients underwent minimally invasive surgery colectomies for N2 colorectal cancer (n = 5744). Median nodal yield was 20 (interquartile range, 15-27) in the open group and 21 (interquartile range, 16-28) in the minimally invasive group (p < 0.0001); however, nodal harvest between the 2 groups was not significantly different on multivariate analysis. Perioperative complications were higher on univariate analysis in the open surgery group, with respect to key outcomes including anastomotic leak and death (p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by its retrospective design and by the fact that the staging data collected by the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program are pathological rather than clinical; however, prior studies found a 97% concordance between pathological and clinical N2 determination. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive surgery approaches to colorectal cancer with N2 disease result in equivalent nodal harvests compared with open approaches. Our group supports the use of a minimally invasive approach in advanced nodal stage colorectal cancer in the appropriately selected patient. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B417. LOS ABORDAJES QUIRRGICOS MNIMAMENTE INVASIVOS SON SEGUROS Y APROPIADOS EN EL CNCER COLORRECTAL N: ANTECEDENTES:Existe evidencia emergente de la seguridad oncológica de la cirugía mínimamente invasiva en el cáncer colorrectal T4; sin embargo, semenjante apoyo falta en la enfermedad N2.OBJETIVO:comparar los resultados oncológicos y perioperatorios de la resección quirúrgica para el cáncer colorrectal N2 utilizando un abordaje abierto versus mínimamente invasivo.DISEÑO:Realizamos un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo utilizando los conjuntos de datos de colectomía genéricos y específicos del Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica.AJUSTE:Hospitales de Norte America que participan en el Programa Nacional de Mejoramiento de la Calidad Quirúrgica del Colegio Americano de Cirujanos.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes sometidos a resección quirúrgica electiva por cáncer colorrectal N2 en los hospitales participantes entre 2014 y 2018.INTERVENCIONES:Resección quirúrgica de cáncer colorrectal N2.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VOLORACION:Nuestro resultado principal fue el rendimiento nodal. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron complicaciones perioperatorias y mortalidad.RESULTADOS:1837 pacientes fueron sometidos a cirugía abierta y 3907 pacientes fueron sometidos a colectomías de cirugía mínimamente invasiva por cáncer colorrectal N2 (n = 5744). La mediana del rendimiento nodal fue 20 (IQR 15-27) en el grupo abierto y 21 (IQR 16-28) en el grupo mínimamente invasivo (p <0,0001); sin embargo, el rendimiento nodal entre los dos grupos no fue significativamente diferente en el análisis multivariado. Las complicaciones perioperatorias fueron mayores en el análisis univariado en el grupo de cirugía abierta, con respecto a los resultados clave, incluida la fuga anastomótica y la muerte (p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Este estudio está limitado por su diseño retrospectivo y por el hecho de que los datos de estadificación recopilados por NSQIP son patológicos más que clínicos; sin embargo, estudios previos encontraron una concordancia del 97% entre la determinación patológica y clínica de N2.CONCLUSIONES:Los enfoques de cirugía mínimamente invasiva para el cáncer colorrectal con enfermedad N2 dan rendimientos nodales equivalentes a abordajes abiertos. Nuestro grupo apoya el uso de abordaje mínimamente invasivo en el cáncer colorrectal avanzado en estadio ganglionar en el paciente adecuadamente seleccionado. Consulte Video Resumenhttp://links.lww.com/DCR/B417.

Will My Patient Survive an Anastomotic Leak? Predicting Failure to Rescue Using the Modified Frailty Index.

IMPORTANCE: Failure to rescue (FTR), or death after major complications, has emerged as a marker of hospital-level quality of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the predictive performance of the ACS-NSQIP modified frailty index (mFI) in determining FTR following an anastomotic leak (AL) after a colectomy for colorectal cancer. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicenter interrogation of the 2012-2016 American College of Surgeons (ACS) colectomy procedure targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 50,944 patients who underwent colectomy for colorectal cancer. EXPOSURE: Frailty as measured by: (1) Age, ASA, and emergency status (model 1), (2) Age, ASA, emergency status, and mFI (model 2), (3) ACS-NSQIP mortality prediction (model 3). MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURE: Primary outcome was FTR after AL. RESULTS: A total of 1755 patients experienced an AL (3.46%) with a FTR rate of 6.44%. The mean age was 65.6 years (95% CI 65.28-65.58 years), median ASA was 3 (IQR 2-3), 51 patients (2.92%) were partially or totally dependent, 366 (20.86%) were diabetic, 105 (5.98%) had a history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), 32 (1.82%) had a history of congestive heart disease (CHD), and 966 (55.04%) were on hypertensive treatment. The performance of model 1 (AUROC 0.77; 95% CI 0.72-0.81), model 2 (AUROC 0.77; 95% CI 0.73-0.82), and model 3 (AUROC 0.79; 95% CI 0.75-0.83) to predict FTR was not different (p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Age and ASA remain the most reliable predictors of failure to rescue anastomotic leak after colectomy for colorectal cancer. Addition of the modified frailty index, or all variables collected by NSQIP, did not significantly improve predictive performance.

Adequacy of lymph node harvest following colectomy for obstructed and nonobstructed colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Technical and clinical differences in resection of obstructed and non-obstructed colon cancers may result in differences in lymph node retrieval. The objective of this study is to compare the lymph node harvest following resection of obstructed and nonobstructed colon cancer patients. METHODS: A retrospective analysis utilizing the 2014-2018 NSQIP colectomy targeted data set was conducted. One-to-one coarsened exact matching (CEM) was utilized between patients undergoing resection for obstructed and non-obstructed colon cancer. The primary outcome was the adequacy of lymph node retrieval (LNR, ≥12 nodes). RESULTS: CEM resulted in 9412 patients. Patients with obstructed tumors were more likely to have inadequate LNR (13.3% vs 8.2%, p < .001) compared to those with nonobstructed tumors. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with obstructing tumors had worse LNR compared to non-obstructed tumors (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.87; p < .005). Increased age (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.098-0.99), presence of preoperative sepsis (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.055-0.90), left-sided and sigmoid tumors compared to right-sided (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81; OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.82, respectively), and open surgical resection compared to an minimally invasive surgical approach were associated with inadequate LNR (p < .05). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that resection for obstructing colon cancer compared to non-obstructed colon cancer is associated with increased odds of inadequate lymph node harvest.

Current Evidence for Minimally Invasive Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Risk Mitigation Strategies: A Narrative Review.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to review the literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and propose mitigation measures to address these risks. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has caused surgeons the world over to re-evaluate their approach to surgical procedures given concerns over the risk of aerosolization of viral particles and exposure of operating room staff to infection. International society guidelines advise against the use of laparoscopy; however, the evidence on this topic is scant and recommendations are based on the perceived most cautious course of action. METHODS: We conducted a narrative review of the existing literature surrounding the risks of viral transmission during laparoscopic surgery and balance these risks against the benefits of minimally invasive approaches. We also propose mitigation measures to address these risks that we have adopted in our institution. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: While it is currently assumed that open surgery minimizes operating room staff exposure to the virus, our findings reveal that this may not be the case. A well-informed, evidence-based opinion is critical when making decisions regarding which operative approach to pursue, for the safety and well-being of the patient, the operating room staff, and the healthcare system at large. Minimally invasive surgical approaches offer significant advantages with respect to both patient care, and the mitigation of the risk of viral transmission during surgery, provided the appropriate equipment and expertise are present.

Racial Disparities in Surgery: A Cross-Specialty Matched Comparison Between Black and White Patients.

Objective: To determine if Black race is associated with worse short-term postoperative morbidity and mortality when compared to White race in a contemporary, cross-specialty-matched cohort. Background: Growing evidence suggests poorer outcomes for Black patients undergoing surgery. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted comprising of all patients undergoing surgery in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset between 2012 and 2018. One-to-one coarsened exact matching was conducted between Black and White patients. Primary outcome was rate of 30-day morbidity and mortality. Results: After 1:1 matching, 615,118 patients were identified. Black race was associated with increased rate of all-cause morbidity (odds ratio [OR] = 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.13, P < 0.001) and mortality (OR = 1.15, 95% CI 1.01-1.31, P = 0.039). Black race was associated with increased risk of re-intubation (OR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.21-1.48, P < 0.001), pulmonary embolism (OR = 1.55, 95% CI 1.40-1.71, P < 0.001), failure to wean from ventilator for >48 hours (OR = 1.14, 95% CI 1.02-1.29, P < 0.001), progressive renal insufficiency (OR = 1.63, 95% CI 1.43-1.86, P < 0.001), acute renal failure (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.16-1.66, P < 0.001), cardiac arrest (OR = 1.47, 95% CI 1.24-1.76 P < 0.001), bleeding requiring transfusion (OR = 1.39, 95% CI 1.34-1.43, P < 0.001), DVT/thrombophlebitis (OR = 1.24, 95% CI 1.14-1.35, P < 0.001), and sepsis/septic shock (OR = 1.09, 95% CI 1.03-1.15, P < 0.001). Black patients were also more likely to have a readmission (OR = 1.12, 95% CI 1.10-1.16, P < 0.001), discharge to a rehabilitation center (OR = 1.73, 95% CI 1.66-1.80, P < 0.001) or facility other than home (OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.16-1.23, P < 0.001). Conclusion and Relevance: This contemporary matched analysis demonstrates an association with increased morbidity, mortality, and readmissions for Black patients across surgical procedures and specialties.

Benefits of minimally-invasive surgery for sigmoid and rectal cancer in older adults compared with younger adults: Do older adults have the most to gain?

INTRODUCTION: Randomized trials demonstrated oncologic safety and short-term benefits of laparoscopy. We investigated if the benefit of laparoscopy on short-term outcomes is greater for older adults compared with younger adults. METHODS: We identified all older (≥70 years old) and younger (<70) adults with primary sigmoid and rectal cancer treated with resection between 2002 and 2018 from an institutional database. We compared 30-day postoperative outcomes using multivariable logistic regression with an interaction term between age group and surgical approach. Primary outcomes were death, major (Clavien-Dindo III-IV) and minor (Clavien-Dindo I-II) complications, and wound complications. RESULTS: We included 792 patients, 293 (37%) older and 499 (63%) younger. Use of laparoscopy was similar between age groups: 120/293 (41%) older, 204/499 (41%) younger (p = .98). All patients had 30-day follow-up. Compared with open resection, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in deaths in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 7.0% less versus 2.1% less in younger adults; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] older 3.01, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.31-7.33; aOR younger 0.31, 95% CI 0.05-1.24; interaction p = .01). Similarly, minimally-invasive resection was associated with a greater reduction in major complications in older adults than in younger adults (absolute difference in older adults 6.4% less versus 2.4% less in younger adults; aOR older 1.91, 95% CI 1.07-3.41; aOR younger 0.70, 95% CI 0.34-1.38; interaction p = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Minimally-invasive compared with open surgery demonstrated a differential benefit on postoperative death and major complications between younger and older adults.