Excess mortality after curative surgery for colorectal cancer changes over time and differs for patients with colon versus rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Improved management of colorectal cancer patients has resulted in better five-year survival for rectal cancer compared with colon cancer. We compared excess mortality rates in various time intervals after surgery in patients with colon and rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We analysed all patients with curative resection of colorectal cancers reported in the Cancer Registry of Norway before (1994-1996) and after (2001-2003) national treatment guidelines were introduced. Excess mortality was analysed in different postoperative time intervals within the five-year follow-up periods for patients treated in 1994-1996 vs. 2001-2003. RESULTS: A total of 11 437 patients that underwent curative resection were included. For patients treated from 1994 to 1996, excess mortality was similar in colon and rectal cancer patients in all time intervals. For those treated from 2001 to 2003, excess mortality was significantly lower in rectal cancer patients than in colon cancer patients perioperatively (in the first 60 days: excess mortality ratio = 0.46, p = 0.007) and during the first two postoperative years (2-12 months: excess mortality ratio = 0.54, p = 0.010; 1-2 years: excess mortality ratio = 0.60, p = 0.009). Excess mortality in rectal cancer patients was significantly greater than in colon cancer patients 4-5 years postoperatively (excess mortality ratio = 2.18, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Excess mortality for colon and rectal cancer changed substantially after the introduction of national treatment guidelines. Short-term excess mortality rates was higher in colon cancer compared to rectal cancer for patients treated in 2001-2003, while excess mortality rates for rectal cancer patients was significantly higher later in the follow-up period. This suggests that future research should focus on these differences of excess mortality in patients curatively treated for cancer of the colon and rectum.

Development and clinical implementation of a structured, simulation-based training programme in laparoscopic appendectomy: description, validation and evaluation.

Background: Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure in general surgery but is likely underused in structured and real-life teaching. This study describes the development, validation and evaluation of implementing a structured training programme for laparoscopic appendectomy. Study design: A structured curriculum and simulation-based programme for trainees and trainers was developed. All general surgery trainees and trainers were involved in laparoscopic appendectomies. All trainees and trainers underwent the structured preprocedure training programme before real-life surgery evaluation. A standardised form evaluated eight technical steps (skills) of the procedure as well as an overall assessment, and nine elements of communication (feedback), and was used for bilateral evaluation by each trainee and trainer. A consecutive, observational cohort over a 12-month period was used to gauge real-life implementation. Results: During 277 eligible real-life appendectomies, structured evaluation was performed in 173 (62%) laparoscopic appendectomies, for which 165 forms were completed by 19 trainees. Construct validity was found satisfactory. Inter-rater reliability demonstrated good correlation between trainee and trainer. The trainees' and trainers' stepwise and overall assessments of technical skills had an overall good reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.88). The vast majority (92.2%) of the trainees either agreed or strongly agreed that the training met their expectations. Conclusion: Structured training for general surgery residents can be implemented for laparoscopic appendectomy. Skills assessment by trainees and trainers indicated reliable self-assessment. Overall, the trainees were satisfied with the training, including the feedback from the trainers.

Lymph node harvest in colon cancer: influence of microsatellite instability and proximal tumor location.

BACKGROUND: At least 12 harvested lymph nodes are recommended for proper staging of colon cancer. The effect of tumor-related factors associated with lymph node harvest is not well understood as data are lacking. We investigated tumor-related factors in relation to the number of lymph nodes harvested. METHODS: Patient and tumor characteristics were investigated in relation to harvested lymph nodes (LN >or= 12), number of metastatic nodes, LN ratio (LNR), and prognosis with univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: An LN harvest >or=12 nodes was achieved in 36% of the patients. Having <12 nodes harvested was not associated with increased risk for locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis, or decreased survival. Tumor size >5 cm, microsatellite instability (MSI), and proximal tumor location predicted a harvest of LN >or= 12. The highest rate (54%) of LN >or= 12 was found for MSI cancers [odds ratio (OR) 2.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.3-6.5; P = 0.011]. Multivariate analysis identified a proximal location as an independent factor of LN >or= 12 (adjusted OR 3.5, 95% CI 1.5-8.2; P = 0.003), with MSI an independent factor in stage II to III colon cancer (adjusted OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.1-6.0; P = 0.026). To determine the best prognosticator, LNR was the only significant factor in the multivariate analysis (Cox proportional hazards) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.9 (95% CI 1.1-7.8; P = 0.038) for LNR 0.01-0.17 and an HR of 5.8 (95% CI 2.5-13.1; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Proximal tumor location and microsatellite instability are associated with a higher number of lymph nodes harvested, pointing to possible underlying genetic and immunologic mechanisms. The LNR is an independent prognostic variable for colon cancer.