Treatment interval in curative treatment of colon cancer, does it impact (cancer free) survival? A non-inferiority analysis.

BACKGROUND: In treatment of colon cancer, strict waiting-time targets are enforced, leaving professionals no room to lengthen treatment intervals when advisable, for instance to optimise a patient's health status by means of prehabilitation. Good quality studies supporting these targets are lacking. With this study we aim to establish whether a prolonged treatment interval is associated with a clinically relevant deterioration in overall and cancer free survival. METHODS: This retrospective multicenter non-inferiority study includes all consecutive patients who underwent elective oncological resection of a biopsy-proven primary non-metastatic colon carcinoma between 2010 and 2016 in six hospitals in the Southern Netherlands. Treatment interval was defined as time between diagnosis and surgical treatment. Cut-off points for treatment interval were ≤35 days and ≤49 days. FINDINGS: 3376 patients were included. Cancer recurred in 505 patients (15.0%) For cancer free survival, a treatment interval >35 days and >49 days was non-inferior to a treatment interval ≤35 days. Results for overall survival were inconclusive, but no association was found. CONCLUSION: For cancer free survival, a prolonged treatment interval, even over 49 days, is non-inferior to the currently set waiting-time target of ≤35 days. Therefore, the waiting-time targets set as fundamental objective in current treatment guidelines should become directional instead of strict targets.

Risk Factor Targeted Perioperative Care Reduces Anastomotic Leakage after Colorectal Surgery: The DoubleCheck study.

OBJECTIVE: The DoubleCheck study aimed to introduce pre- and perioperative interventions minimizing exposure to modifiable risk factors and determine its effect on CAL. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) is a severe complication. In order to predict and prevent its occurrence, the LekCheck study identified intraoperative modifiable risk factors for CAL: anemia, hyperglycemia, hypothermia, incorrect timing of antibiotic prophylaxis, administration of vasopressors and epidural analgesia. METHODS: This international open-labelled interventional study was performed between September 2021 and December 2023. An enhanced care bundle consisting of anemia correction, glucose measurement, attaining normothermia, antibiotics administration within 60 to 15 minutes preoperatively, refraining from vasopressors and epidural analgesia was introduced. Primary outcome was the occurrence of intraoperative risk factors just prior to the anastomosis creation. Secondary outcomes were CAL and mortality. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis were performed to establish the relationship between the enhanced care bundle, exposure to the six factors and CAL. RESULTS: The historical LekCheck group consisted of 1572 patients versus 902 in the DoubleCheck. The LekCheck group had a mean of 1.84 risk factors versus 1.63 in DoubleCheck ( P <0.001). In the DoubleCheck significantly less patients had ≥3 risk factors ( P <0.001). CAL was significantly lower in the DoubleCheck group (8.6% vs. 6.2%, P =0.039). The reduction of CAL was associated with the enhanced care bundle in multivariate regression analysis (OR 1.521, 95% CI 1.01-2.29, P =0.045). The mortality rate did not differ significantly (1.3%, vs. 0.8%, P =0.237). CONCLUSIONS: The DoubleCheck study showed that optimization of modifiable risk factors reduced CAL in colorectal surgery.

Multimodal prehabilitation in elective oncological colorectal surgery enhances preoperative physical fitness: a single center prospective real-world data analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgery can lead to curation in colorectal cancer (CRC) but is associated with significant morbidity. Prehabilitation plays an important role in increasing preoperative physical fitness to reduce morbidity risk; however, data from real-world practice is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the change in preoperative physical fitness and to evaluate which patients benefit most from prehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single-arm prospective cohort study, consecutive patients undergoing elective colorectal oncological surgery were offered a 3- to 4-week multimodal prehabilitation program (supervised physical exercise training, dietary consultation, protein and vitamin supplementation, smoking cessation, and psychological support). The primary outcome was the change in preoperative aerobic fitness (steep ramp test (SRT)). Secondary outcomes were the change in functional walking capacity (6-minute walk test (6MWT)), and muscle strength (one-repetition maximum (1RM) for various muscle groups). To evaluate who benefit most from prehabilitation, participants were divided in quartiles (Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4) based on baseline performance. RESULTS: In total, 101 patients participated (51.4% male, aged 69.7 ± 12.7 years). The preoperative change in SRT was +28.3 W, +0.36 W/kg, +16.7% (P<0.001). Patients in all quartiles improved at the group level; however, the relative improvement decreased from Q1-Q2, Q2-Q3, and Q3-Q4 (P=0.049). Change in 6MWT was +37.5 m, +7.7% (P<0.001) and 1RM improved with 5.6-33.2 kg, 16.1-32.5% for the various muscle groups (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Prehabilitation in elective oncological colorectal surgery is associated with enhanced preoperative physical fitness regardless of baseline performance. Improvements were relatively larger in less fit patients.

Hospital variation and outcomes after repeat hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases: a nationwide cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 70% of patients with colorectal liver metastases (CRLM) experiences intrahepatic recurrence after initial liver resection. This study assessed outcomes and hospital variation in repeat liver resections (R-LR). METHODS: This population-based study included all patients who underwent liver resection for CRLM between 2014 and 2022 in the Netherlands. Overall survival (OS) was collected for patients operated on between 2014 and 2018 by linkage to the insurance database. RESULTS: Data of 7479 liver resections (1391 (18.6%) repeat and 6088 (81.4%) primary) were analysed. Major morbidity and mortality were not different. Factors associated with major morbidity included ASA 3+, major liver resection, extrahepatic disease, and open surgery. Five-year OS after repeat versus primary liver resection was 42.3% versus 44.8%, P = 0.37. Factors associated with worse OS included largest CRLM >5 cm (aHR 1.58, 95% CI: 1.07-2.34, P = 0.023), >3 CRLM (aHR 1.33, 95% CI: 1.00-1.75, P = 0.046), extrahepatic disease (aHR 1.60, 95% CI: 1.25-2.04, P = 0.001), positive tumour margins (aHR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.09-1.85, P = 0.009). Significant hospital variation in performance of R-LR was observed, median 18.9% (8.2% to 33.3%). CONCLUSION: Significant hospital variation was observed in performance of R-LR in the Netherlands reflecting different treatment decisions upon recurrence. On a population-based level R-LR leads to satisfactory survival.

Oncological Safety and Potential Cost Savings of Routine vs Selective Histopathological Examination After Appendectomy: Results of the Multicenter, Prospective, Cross-Sectional FANCY Study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the oncological safety and potential cost savings of selective histopathological examination after appendectomy. BACKGROUND: The necessity of routine histopathological examination after appendectomy has been questioned, but prospective studies investigating the safety of a selective policy are lacking. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, cross-sectional study, inspection and palpation of the (meso)appendix was performed by the surgeon in patients with suspected appendicitis. The surgeon's opinion on additional value of histopathological examination was reported before sending all specimens to the pathologist. Main outcomes were the number of hypothetically missed appendiceal neoplasms with clinical consequences benefiting the patient (upper limit two-sided 95% confidence interval below 3:1000 considered oncologically safe) and potential cost savings after selective histopathological examination. RESULTS: Seven thousand three hundred thirty-nine patients were included. After a selective policy, 4966/7339 (67.7%) specimens would have been refrained from histopathological examination. Appendiceal neoplasms with clinical consequences would have been missed in 22/4966 patients. In 5/22, residual disease was completely resected during additional surgery. Hence, an appendiceal neoplasm with clinical consequences benefiting the patient would have been missed in 1.01:1000 patients (upper limit 95% confidence interval 1.61:1000). In contrast, twice as many patients (10/22) would not have been exposed to potential harm due to re-resections without clear benefit, whereas consequences were neither beneficial nor harmful in the remaining seven. Estimated cost savings established by replacing routine for selective histopathological examination were €725,400 per 10,000 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Selective histopathological examination after appendectomy for suspected appendicitis is oncologically safe and will likely result in a reduction of pathologists' workload, less costs, and fewer re-resections without clear benefit.

Fluid management and vasopressor use during colorectal surgery: the search for the optimal balance.

BACKGROUND: Although it is known that excessive intraoperative fluid and vasopressor agents are detrimental for anastomotic healing, optimal anesthesiology protocols for colorectal surgery are currently lacking. OBJECTIVE: To scrutinize the current hemodynamic practice and vasopressor use and their relation to colorectal anastomotic leakage. DESIGN: A secondary analysis of a previously published prospective observational study: the LekCheck study. STUDY SETTING: Adult patients undergoing a colorectal resection with the creation of a primary anastomosis. OUTCOME MEASURES: Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) within 30 days postoperatively, hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: Of the 1548 patients, 579 (37%) received vasopressor agents during surgery. Of these, 201 were treated with solely noradrenaline, 349 were treated with phenylephrine, and 29 received ephedrine. CAL rate significantly differed between the patients receiving vasopressor agents during surgery compared to patients without (11.8% vs 6.3%, p < 0.001). CAL was significantly higher in the group receiving phenylephrine compared to noradrenaline (14.3% vs 6%, p < 0.001). Vasopressor agents were used more often in patients treated with Goal Directed Therapy (47% vs 34.6%, p < 0.001). There was a higher mortality rate in patients with vasopressors compared to the group without (2.8% vs 0.4%, p = 0.01, OR 3.8). Mortality was higher in the noradrenaline group compared to the phenylephrine and those without vasopressors (5% vs. 0.4% and 1.7%, respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, patients with intraoperative vasopressor agents had an increased risk to develop CAL (OR 2.1, CI 1.3-3.2, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: The present study contributes to the evidence that intraoperative use of vasopressor agents is associated with a higher rate of CAL. This study helps to create awareness on the (necessity to) use of vasopressor agents in colorectal surgery patients in striving for successful anastomotic wound healing. Future research will be required to balance vasopressor agent dosage in view of colorectal anastomotic leakage.

Prehabilitation versus no prehabilitation to improve functional capacity, reduce postoperative complications and improve quality of life in colorectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Surgery is the cornerstone in curative treatment of colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, surgery itself can adversely affect patient health. 'Enhanced Recovery After Surgery' programmes, which include multimodal interventions, have improved patient outcomes substantially. However, these are mainly applied peri- and postoperatively. Multimodal prehabilitation includes multiple preoperative interventions to prepare patients for surgery with the aim of increasing resilience, thereby improving postoperative outcomes. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of multimodal prehabilitation programmes on functional capacity, postoperative complications, and quality of life in adult patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO in January 2021. We also searched trial registries up to March 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in adult patients with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for surgery, comparing multimodal prehabilitation programmes (defined as comprising at least two preoperative interventions) with no prehabilitation. We focused on the following outcomes: functional capacity (i.e. 6-minute walk test, VO2peak, handgrip strength), postoperative outcomes (i.e. complications, mortality, length of hospital stay, emergency department visits, re-admissions), health-related quality of life, compliance, safety of prehabilitation, and return to normal activities. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently selected studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias and used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence. Any disagreements were solved with discussion and consensus. We pooled data to perform meta-analyses, where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included three RCTs that enrolled 250 participants with non-metastatic colorectal cancer, scheduled for elective (mainly laparoscopic) surgery. Included trials were conducted in tertiary care centres and recruited patients during periods ranging from 17 months to 45 months. A total of 130 participants enrolled in a preoperative four-week trimodal prehabilitation programme consisting of exercise, nutritional intervention, and anxiety reduction techniques. Outcomes of these participants were compared to those of 120 participants who started an identical but postoperative programme. Postoperatively, prehabilitation may improve functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test at four and eight weeks (mean difference (MD) 26.02, 95% confidence interval (CI) -13.81 to 65.85; 2 studies; n = 131; and MD 26.58, 95% CI -8.88 to 62.04; 2 studies; n = 140); however, the certainty of evidence is low and very low, respectively, due to serious risk of bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. After prehabilitation, the functional capacity before surgery improved, with a clinically relevant mean difference of 24.91 metres (95% CI 11.24 to 38.57; 3 studies; n = 225). The certainty of evidence was moderate due to downgrading for serious risk of bias. The effects of prehabilitation on the number of complications (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.29; 3 studies; n = 250), emergency department visits (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.32; 3 studies; n = 250) and re-admissions (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.65; 3 studies; n = 250) were small or even trivial. The certainty of evidence was low due to downgrading for serious risk of bias and imprecision. The effects on VO2peak, handgrip strength, length of hospital stay, mortality rate, health-related quality of life, return to normal activities, safety of the programme, and compliance rate could not be analysed quantitatively due to missing or insufficient data. The included studies did not report a difference between groups for health-related quality of life and length of hospital stay. Data on remaining outcomes were not reported or were reported inadequately in the included studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation may result in an improved functional capacity, determined with the 6-minute walk test both preoperatively and postoperatively. A solid effect on the number of omplications, postoperative emergency department visits and re-admissions could not be established. The certainty of evidence ranges from moderate to very low, due to downgrading for serious risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency. In addition, only three heterogeneous studies were included in this review. Therefore, the findings of this review should be interpreted with caution. Numerous relevant RCTs are ongoing and will be included in a future update of this review.

Implementation of perioperative music in day care surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative music can have beneficial effects on postoperative pain and perioperative opioid requirement. This study aims to assess the implementation feasibility of music in day care surgery through adherence to implementation, as well as its effects. METHODS: This implementation study employed a prospective single-center study design. Perioperative music was implemented as part of standard surgical care during day care surgery procedures. The music intervention consisted of preselected playlists. Primary outcome was adherence to implementation. Barriers and attitudes towards music of patients and perioperative care providers were evaluated. Furthermore, the effects of music were assessed through a matched cohort analysis. This study was registered with the Netherlands Trial Register (NL8213). RESULTS: From January to April 2020, a total of 109 patients received the music intervention and 97 were analyzed after matching to retrospective controls. Adherence rate to the music intervention was 92% preoperatively, 81% intraoperatively, and 86% postoperatively, with 83% of patients satisfied with the preselected music, and 93% finding music to be beneficial to surgical care. All health care providers believed perioperative music to be beneficial (63%) or were neutral (37%) towards its use. Postoperative pain was not significantly different (mean numeric rating scale 0.74; the music intervention group versus 0.68; control group, p = .363). Although not statistically significant, postoperative opioid requirement in the music group was lower (30% versus 40%, p = .132). CONCLUSION: Perioperative music implementation in day care surgery is feasible with high adherence rates, patient satisfaction levels, and positive attitudes of health care providers towards its use.

A Dutch prediction tool to assess the risk of incidental gallbladder cancers after cholecystectomies for benign gallstone disease.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing implementation of selective histopathologic policies for post-cholecystectomy evaluation of gallbladder specimens in low-incidence countries, the fear of missing incidental gallbladder cancer (GBC) persists. This study aimed to develop a diagnostic prediction model for selecting gallbladders that require additional histopathological examination after cholecystectomy. METHODS: A registration-based retrospective cohort study of nine Dutch hospitals was conducted between January 2004 and December 2014. Data were collected using a secure linkage of three patient databases, and potential clinical predictors of gallbladder cancer were selected. The prediction model was validated internally by using bootstrapping. Its discriminative capacity and accuracy were tested by assessing the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), Nagelkerke's pseudo-R2, and Brier score. RESULTS: Using a cohort of 22,025 gallbladders, including 75 GBC cases, a prediction model with the following variables was developed: age, sex, urgency, type of surgery, and indication for surgery. After correction for optimism, Nagelkerke's R2 and Brier score were 0.32 and 88%, respectively, indicating a moderate model fit. The AUC was 90.3% (95% confidence interval, 86.2%-94.4%), indicating good discriminative ability. CONCLUSION: We developed a good clinical prediction model for selecting gallbladder specimens for histopathologic examination after cholecystectomy to rule out GBC.

Quality of Recovery and Innate Immune Homeostasis in Patients Undergoing Low-pressure Versus Standard-pressure Pneumoperitoneum During Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery (RECOVER): A Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of intra-abdominal pressure on the quality of recovery and innate cytokine production capacity after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within the enhanced recovery after surgery program. BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence for the safety and advantages of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum facilitated by deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB). Nonetheless, there is a weak understanding of the relationship between clinical outcomes, surgical injury, postoperative immune dysfunction, and infectious complications. METHODS: Randomized controlled trial of 178 patients treated at standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum (12 mm Hg) with moderate NMB (train-of-four 1-2) or low pressure (8 mm Hg) facilitated by deep NMB (posttetanic count 1-2). The primary outcome was the quality of recovery (Quality of Recovery 40 questionnaire) on a postoperative day 1 (POD1). The primary outcome of the immune substudy (n=100) was ex vivo tumor necrosis factor α production capacity upon endotoxin stimulation on POD1. RESULTS: Quality of Recovery 40 score on POD1 was significantly higher at 167 versus 159 [mean difference (MD): 8.3 points; 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.5, 14.1; P =0.005] and the decline in cytokine production capacity was significantly less for tumor necrosis factor α and interleukin-6 (MD: -172 pg/mL; 95% CI: -316, -27; P =0.021 and MD: -1282 pg/mL; 95% CI: -2505, -59; P =0.040, respectively) for patients operated at low pressure. Low pressure was associated with reduced surgical site hypoxia and inflammation markers and circulating damage-associated molecular patterns, with a less impaired early postoperative ex vivo cytokine production capacity. At low pressure, patients reported lower acute pain scores and developed significantly less 30-day infectious complications. CONCLUSIONS: Low intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopic colorectal surgery is safe, improves the postoperative quality of recovery and preserves innate immune homeostasis, and forms a valuable addition to future enhanced recovery after surgery programs.