The impact of operative approach for obese colorectal cancer patients: analysis of the National Inpatient Sample 2015-2019.

AIM: Obesity is a well-established risk factor for the development of colorectal cancer. As such, patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer have increasingly higher body mass indices (BMIs). The advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques in recent years have helped surgeons circumvent some of the challenges associated with operating in the setting of obesity. While previous studies suggest that laparoscopy improves outcomes compared with open surgery in obese patients, this has never been established at the population level. Therefore, we designed a retrospective database study using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) with the aim of comparing laparoscopic with open approaches for obese patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of the NIS from 2015 to 2019 was conducted including patients with a BMI of greater than 30 kg/m2 undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. The primary outcomes were postoperative in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Secondary outcomes included postoperative system-specific complications, total admission healthcare cost and length of stay (LOS). Multivariable logistic and linear regressions were utilized to compare the two operative approaches. RESULTS: A total of 4742 patients underwent open surgery and 3231 underwent laparoscopic surgery. We observed a significant decrease in overall postoperative morbidity [17.5% vs. 31.4%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.50-0.64; p < 0.001], gastrointestinal morbidity (8.1% vs. 14.5%, aOR 0.59, 95% CI 0.50-0.69; p < 0.001) and genitourinary morbidity (10.1% vs. 18.6%, aOR 0.61, 95% CI 0.52-0.70; p < 0.001) with the use of laparoscopy. Postoperative LOS was 1.7 days shorter (95% CI 1.5-2.0, p < 0.001) and cost of admission was decreased by $9106 (95% CI $4638-$13 573, p < 0.001) with laparoscopy. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic surgery for obese patients with colorectal cancer is associated with significantly decreased postoperative morbidity and improved healthcare resource utilization compared with open surgery. Laparoscopic approaches should be relied upon whenever feasible for these patients.

Perioperative intravenous dexamethasone for patients undergoing colorectal surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Dexamethasone is a glucocorticoid that is often administered intraoperatively as prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have examined its use in colorectal surgery. This systematic review aims to assess the postoperative impacts of dexamethasone use in colorectal surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched from database inception to January 2023. Articles were included if they compared perioperative intravenous dexamethasone to a control group in patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in terms of postoperative morbidity. The primary outcomes were prolonged postoperative ileus (PPOI) and PONV. Secondary outcomes included postoperative infectious morbidity and return of bowel function. A pair-wise meta-analysis and GRADE assessment of the quality of evidence were performed. RESULTS: After reviewing 3476 relevant citations, seven articles (five RCTs, two retrospective cohorts) met the inclusion criteria. Overall, 1568 patients received perioperative dexamethasone and 1459 patients received a control. Patients receiving perioperative dexamethasone experienced significantly less PPOI based on moderate-quality evidence (three studies, OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.28-0.74, p < 0.01). Time to first flatus was significantly reduced with intravenous dexamethasone. There was no difference between groups in terms of PONV (four studies, OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.64-1.27, p = 0.55), postoperative morbidity (OR 0.93, 95%CI 0.63-1.39, p = 0.74), or rate of postoperative infectious complications (seven studies, OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.55-1.01, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: This review presents moderate-quality evidence that perioperative intravenous dexamethasone may reduce PPOI and enhance the return of bowel function following elective colorectal surgery. There was no significant observed effect on PONV or postoperative infectious complications.

Regional Variation in Laparoscopy Use for Elective Colon Cancer Treatment in Canada: The Importance of Fellowship Training Sites.

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, use of laparoscopy for the treatment of colon cancer has been variable despite evidence of benefit, possibly reflecting surgeon expertise rather than other factors. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine the spatial variation in the use of laparoscopy for colon cancer surgery and to determine what factors may influence use. DESIGN: This was a population-based retrospective analysis from April 2008 to March 2015. SETTINGS: All Canadian provinces (excluding Quebec) were included. PATIENTS: The study included all patients ≥18 years of age undergoing elective colectomy for colon cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was laparoscopy use rates. Predictors of use included patient and disease characteristics, year of surgery, rurality, hospital and surgeon volumes, and distance from a colorectal fellowship training center. RESULTS: A total of 34,725 patients were identified, and 42% underwent laparoscopic surgery. Significant spatial variations in laparoscopy use were identified, with 95% of high-use clusters located ≤100 km and 98% of low-use clusters located >100 km from a colorectal fellowship center. There were no high-use clusters located around large academic centers without colorectal fellowships. At the individual level, patients living within 25 km and 26 to 100 km of a fellowship center were 2.6 and 1.6 times more likely to undergo laparoscopic surgery compared with those >100 km away (95% CI, 2.47-2.79, p < 0.00; 95% CI, 1.53-1.71, p < 0.001). Surgeon and hospital volumes were associated with increased rates of laparoscopy use (p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Data were obtained from an administrative database, and despite 85% to 95% published validity, they remain subject to misclassification, response, and measurement bias. CONCLUSIONS: Significant spatial variations in the use of laparoscopy for colon cancer surgery exist. After adjusting for patient and system factors, proximity to a colorectal fellowship training center remained a strong predictor of laparoscopy use. There remain regional variations in colon cancer treatment, with discrepancies in the surgical care offered to Canadian patients based solely on location. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B595. VARIACIN REGIONAL EN EL USO DE LAPAROSCOPIA PARA EL TRATAMIENTO ELECTIVO DEL CNCER DE COLON EN CANAD LA IMPORTANCIA DE LOS SITIOS DE CAPACITACIN PARA RESIDENTES: ANTECEDENTES:Durante la última década, la utilización de la laparoscopia para el tratamiento del cáncer de colon ha sido variable a pesar de la evidencia de beneficio; posiblemente reflejando la experiencia del cirujano, más que otros factores.OBJETIVO:Examinar la variación espacial en el uso de la laparoscopia para la cirugía del cáncer de colon y determinar qué factores pueden influir en la utilización.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo poblacional de abril de 2008 a marzo de 2015.ENTORNO CLÍNICO:Todas las provincias canadienses (excepto Quebec).PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes> 18 años sometidos a colectomía electiva por cáncer de colon.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El principal resultado fueron las tasas de utilización de laparoscopia. Los predictores de uso incluyeron las características del paciente y la enfermedad, el año de la cirugía, la ruralidad, los volúmenes de hospitales y cirujanos, y la distancia a un centro de formación de residentes colorectales.RESULTADOS:Se identificaron 34.725 pacientes, 42% fueron sometidos a cirugía laparoscópica. Se identificaron variaciones espaciales significativas en el uso de laparoscopia, con el 95% de los conglomerados de alto uso ubicados a <100 km y el 98% de los conglomerados de bajo uso ubicados a> 100 km, desde un centro de residencia colorectal. No había grupos de alto uso ubicados alrededor de grandes centros académicos sin residentes colorrectales. A nivel individual, los pacientes que vivían dentro de los 25 km y 26-100 km de un centro de residentes tenían 2,6 y 1,6 veces más probabilidades de someterse a una cirugía laparoscópica, respectivamente, en comparación con aquellos a> 100 km de distancia (95% CI 2,47-2,79, p <0,00; IC del 95% 1,53-1,71, p <0,001). Los volúmenes de cirujanos y hospitales se asociaron con mayores tasas de utilización de laparoscopia (p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:Los datos se obtuvieron de una base de datos administrativa y, a pesar de una validez publicada del 85-95%, siguen sujetos a errores de clasificación, respuesta y sesgo de medición.CONCLUSIONES:Existen variaciones espaciales significativas en el uso de la laparoscopia para la cirugía del cáncer de colon. Después de ajustar por factores del paciente y del sistema, la proximidad a un centro de formación de residentes colorectales siguió siendo un fuerte predictor del uso de laparoscopia. Sigue habiendo variaciones regionales en el tratamiento del cáncer de colon, con discrepancias en la atención quirúrgica ofrecida a los pacientes canadienses basadas únicamente en la ubicación. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B595.

Uptake of minimally invasive surgery for early stage colorectal cancer and its effect on survival: A population-based study.

PURPOSE: The uptake of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer (CRC) varies between jurisdictions. We aimed to identify the factors associated with the uptake of MIS for early-stage CRC and its oncologic outcomes in the Canadian province of Ontario. METHODS: This study includes all patients with CRC in Ontario from 2007 to 2017. A logistic regression analysis was used to identify the predictors of MIS and a flexible parametric survival model to estimate survival rates based on MIS versus open surgery. RESULTS: In total, 14,675 patients with CRC were identified of which 29.5% had MIS resections. The likelihood of undergoing MIS decreased with age, disease stage, and distance to the regional cancer center, and increased with year of diagnosis. The likelihood of mortality for MIS was significantly lower compared to open surgery (p < 0.001). In terms of survival, MIS was most beneficial to older patients with stage II disease, despite their lower likelihood of receiving MIS. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the lower uptake of MIS among older patients and patients with stage II disease, these patients had the greatest long-term survival benefit from MIS. This suggests further use of laparoscopy to patient populations that are often excluded.

Management of the normal-appearing appendix during laparoscopy for clinically suspected acute appendicitis in the pediatric population.

PURPOSE: The widespread use of laparoscopy has brought forth the question of how to manage a macroscopically normal-appearing appendix in cases of clinically suspected appendicitis. This study aimed to determine the current practices of pediatric general surgeons in Canada regarding this matter. METHODS: An online survey was created following the American Pediatric Surgical Association (APSA) guidelines and distributed via email to the Canadian Association of Pediatric Surgeons (CAPS) staff surgeons. The questions assessed clinician characteristics, standard practice, and rationale. Results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 54/72 (75%) CAPS members practicing in Canada completed the survey. All (100%) agreed they would remove a normal-appearing appendix during laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis. The most common reasons were: possibility of microscopic appendicitis (39/54, 72.2%), avoiding future diagnostic confusion (28/54, 51.9%), and patient preference/consent discussion (21/54, 38.9%). Most (53/54, 98.1%) had performed a negative appendectomy and 49/54 (90.7%) agreed there were no sufficient guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of pediatric surgeons agree sufficient guidelines do not exist to support decision making when a normal-appearing appendix is found during laparoscopy for suspected acute appendicitis. This survey shows that removal of the appendix in this case would be supported by the majority of Canadian pediatric surgeons. TYPE OF STUDY: Survey LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: VII (Expert Opinion).