Preventative strategies for low anterior resection syndrome.

BACKGROUND: A common and debilitating complication of low anterior resection for rectal cancer is low anterior resection syndrome (LARS). As a multifactorial entity, LARS is poorly understood and challenging to treat. Despite this, prevention strategies are commonly overlooked. Our aim was to review the pathophysiology of LARS and explore current evidence on the efficacy and feasibility of prophylactic techniques. METHODS: A literature review was performed between [1st January 2000 to 1st October 2023] for studies which investigated preventative interventions for LARS. Mechanisms by which LARS develop are described, followed by a review of prophylactic strategies to prevent LARS. Medline, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched, 189 articles screened, 8 duplicates removed and 18 studies reviewed. RESULTS: Colonic dysmotility, anal sphincter dysfunction and neorectal dysfunction all contribute to the development of LARS, with the complex mechanism of defecation interrupted by surgery. Transanal irrigation (TAI) and pelvic floor rehabilitation (PFR) have shown benefits in preventing LARS, but may be limited by patient compliance. Intraoperative nerve monitoring (IONM) and robotic-assisted surgery have shown some promise in surgically preventing LARS. Nerve stimulation and other novel strategies currently used in treatment of LARS have yet to be investigated in their roles prophylactically. CONCLUSIONS: To date, there is a limited evidence base for all preventative strategies including IONM, RAS, PFP and TAI. These strategies are limited by either access (IONM, RAS and PFP) or acceptability (PFP and TAI), which are both key to the success of any intervention. The results of ongoing trials will serve to assess acceptability, while technological advancement may improve access to some of the aforementioned strategies.

Variations in the definition and perceived importance of positive resection margins in patients with colorectal cancer - an EYSAC international survey.

INTRODUCTION: Microscopically positive resection margins (R1) are associated with poorer outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer. However, different definitions of R1 margins exist. It is unclear to what extent the definitions used in everyday clinical practice differ within and between nations. This study sought to investigate variations in the definition of R1 margins in colorectal cancer and the importance of margin status in clinical decision-making. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 14-point survey was developed by members of The European Society of Surgical Oncology (ESSO) Youngs Surgeons and Alumni Club (EYSAC) Research Academy targeting all members of the multidisciplinary team (MDT) treating patients with colorectal cancer. The survey was distributed on social media, in ESSO's monthly newsletter and via national societies. RESULTS: In total, 137 responses were received. Most respondents were from Europe (89.7%), with the majority from Denmark (56.9%). Less than 2/3 of respondents defined R1 margins as the presence of viable cancer cells ≤1 mm of the margin. Only 60% reported that subdivisions of R1 margins (primary tumour vs tumour deposit vs metastatic lymph node) are routinely available. More than 20% of respondents reported that pathology reports are not routinely reviewed at MDT meetings. Less than half of respondents considered margin status in decision-making for type and duration of adjuvant chemotherapy in Stage III colon cancer. CONCLUSION: The definitions and perceived clinical importance of microscopically positive margins in patients with colorectal cancer appear to vary. Adoption of an international dataset for pathology reporting may help to standardise current practices.

Complete mesocolic excision versus standard resection for colon cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of perioperative safety and an evaluation of the use of a robotic approach.

PURPOSE: Complete mesocolic excision (CME) has been associated with improved oncological outcomes in treatment of colon cancer. However, widespread adoption is limited partly because of the technical complexity and perceived risks of the approach. The aim of out study was to evaluate the safety of CME compared to standard resection and to compare robotic versus laparoscopic approaches. METHODS: Two parallel searches were undertaken in MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science databases 12 December 2021. The first was to evaluate IDEAL stage 3 evidence to compare complication rates as a surrogate marker of perioperative safety between CME and standard resection. The second independent search compared lymph node yield and survival outcomes between minimally invasive approaches. RESULTS: There were four randomized control trials (n = 1422) comparing CME to standard resection, and three studies comparing laparoscopic (n = 164) to robotic (n = 161) approaches. Compared to standard resection, CME was associated with a reduction in Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher complication rates (3.56% vs. 7.24%, p = 0.002), reduced blood loss (113.1 ml vs. 137.6 ml, p < 0.0001) and greater mean lymph node harvest (25.6 vs. 20.9 nodes, p = 0.001). Between the robotic and laparoscopic groups, there were no significant differences in complication rates, blood loss, lymph node yield, 5-year disease-free survival (OR 1.05, p = 0.87) and overall survival (OR 0.83, p = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated improved safety with CME. There was no difference in safety or survival outcomes between robotic and laparoscopic CME. The advantage of a robotic approach may lie in the reduced learning curve and an increased penetration of minimally invasive approach to CME. Further studies are required to explore this. PROSPERO ID: CRD42021287065.

Fallibility of tattooing colonic neoplasia ahead of laparoscopic resection: a retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Precise geographical localisation of colonic neoplasia is a prerequisite for proper laparoscopic oncological resection. Preoperative endoscopic peri-tumoural tattoo practice is routinely recommended but seldom scrutinised. METHODS: A retrospective review of recent consecutive patients with preoperative endoscopic lesional tattoo who underwent laparoscopic colonic resection as identified from our prospectively maintained cancer database with supplementary clinical chart and radiological, histological, endoscopic and theatre database/logbook interrogation. RESULTS: Some 210 patients with 'tattooed' colonic neoplasia were identified, of whom 169 underwent laparoscopic surgery (mean age 68 years, median BMI 27.8kg/m2, male-to-female ratio 95:74). The majority of tumours were malignant (149; 88%), symptomatic (133; 79%) and proximal to the splenic flexure (92; 54%). Inaccurate colonoscopist localisation judgement occurred in 12% of cases, 60% of which were corrected by preoperative staging computed tomography scan. A useful lesional tattoo was absent in 11/169 cases (6.5%) being specifically stated as present in 104 operation notes (61%) and absent in 10 (5.9%). Tumours missing overt peritumoral tattoos intraoperatively were more likely to be smaller, earlier stage and injected longer preoperatively (p=0.006), although half had histological ink staining. Eight lesions missing tattoos were radiologically occult. Four (44%) of these patients had on-table colonoscopy, and five (55%) needed laparotomy (conversion rate 55% vs 23% overall, p<0.005) with one needing a second operation to resect the initially missed target lesion. Mean (range) operative duration and postoperative length of stay of those missing tattoos compared with those with tattoos was 200 (78-300) versus 188 (50-597) min and 15.5 (4-22) versus 12(4-70) days (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Tattoo in advance of attempting laparoscopic resection is vital for precision cancer surgery especially for radiologically unseen tumours to avoid adverse clinical consequence.

Socio-demographic, behavioural and clinical factors influencing control of diabetes and hypertension in urban Mysore, South India: a mixed-method study conducted in 2018.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate control of diabetes and hypertension is a major concern in India because of rising mortality and morbidity. Few studies in India have explored factors that influence control of diabetes and hypertension. The current study aimed to improve the understanding of multifactorial influence on the control of diabetes and hypertension among patients in Primary Health Care Settings(PHC) of urban Karnataka. METHODS: We used a mixed-method study design, within a project aiming to improve non-communicable disease (NCD) continuum of care across PHC in Mysore city, India, conducted in 2018. The quantitative study was conducted among 399 patients with diabetes and/or hypertension and a logistic regression model was used to assess the factors responsible for biological control levels of diabetes and hypertension measured through Glycated Haemoglobin(HbA1c) and blood pressure. Further, in-depth interviews(IDI) were conducted among these patients and the counsellors at PHCs to understand the barriers and enablers for better control. RESULT: The quantitative assessment found odds of poor control amongst diabetics' increased with older age, longer duration of disease, additional chronic conditions, and tobacco consumption. For hypertensives, odds of poor control increased with higher body mass index(BMI), alcohol consumption, and belongingness to lower social groups. These findings were elaborated through qualitative assessment which found that the control status was affected by stress as a result of family or financial worries. Stress, poor lifestyle, and poor health-seeking behaviour interplay with other factors like diet and exercise leading to poor control of diabetes and hypertension. CONCLUSION: A better understanding of determinants associated with disease control can assist in designing focused patient outreach plans, customized communication strategies, need-based care delivery plans, and specific competency-based capacity-building models for health care workers. Patient-centric care focusing on biological, social and behavioural determinants is pivotal for appropriate management of NCDs at community level in low-middle income countries.

Preoperative assessment and optimisation for pelvic exenteration in locally advanced and recurrent rectal cancer: A review.

The pre-operative phase in planning a pelvic exenteration or extended resections is critical to optimising patient outcomes. This review summarises the key components of preoperative assessment and planning in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LLRC) being considered for potential curative resection. The preoperative period can be considered in 5 key phases: 1) Multidisciplinary meeting (MDT) review and recommendation for neoadjuvant therapy and surgery, 2) Anaesthetic preoperative assessment of fitness for surgery and quantification of risk, 3) Shared decision making with the patient and the process of informed consent, 4) Prehabilitation and physiological optimisation 5) Technical aspects of surgical planning. This review will focus on patients who have been recommended for surgery by the MDT and have completed neoadjuvant therapy. Other important considerations beyond the scope of this review are the various neoadjuvant strategies employed which in this patient group include Total Neo-adjuvant Therapy and reirradiation. Critical to improving perioperative outcomes is the dual aim of achieving a negative resection margin in a patient fit enough for extended surgery. Advanced, realistic communication is required pre-operatively and should be maintained throughout recovery. Optimising patient's physiological and psychological reserve with a preoperative prehabilitation programme is important, with physiotherapy, psychological and nutritional input. From a surgical perspective, image based technical preoperative planning is important to identify risk points and ensure correct surgical strategy. Careful attention to the entire patient journey through these 5 preoperative phases can optimise outcomes with the accumulation of marginal gains at multiple timepoints.

Trends and outcomes of non-traumatic major lower extremity amputations in an Irish tertiary referral hospital.

OBJECTIVES: Data on vascular patients following amputation in Ireland is lacking, limiting capability to plan services. This paper seeks to benchmark survival and rehabilitation outcomes among vascular patients in Ireland following lower extremity amputation (LEA), and compare subgroups of those undergoing transfemoral (TFA) or transtibial amputation (TTA). METHODS: A review was conducted of all patients who underwent non-traumatic TFA or TTA from 2000 to 2009 in a tertiary vascular surgery centre. Demographics, surgical data, perioperative outcomes, medium-term functional outcomes, and survival were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-two patients (2:1 male: female) underwent 192 non-traumatic LEAs. Median age for TFA was 75 years and TTA 67 (p = 0.002). A percentage of 36.5% had undergone prior attempts at surgical revascularization, 25% had undergone prior distal amputation or debridement. Thirty-three (17%) required stump revision. Twenty-three (13.2%) died in hospital. Median survival for those who died in hospital was 17 days (0-367), versus 17 months (2-106) for those who survived to discharge. CONCLUSION: LEA for vascular pathology has significant morbidity and mortality, with long in-patient stays and short median survival; there is need to focus on improving quality of life in postoperative pathways.

Use of the eLogbook in surgical training in the United Kingdom: A nationwide survey and consensus recommendations from the Association of Surgeons in Training.

INTRODUCTION: Accurate recording of operative cases is essential during training to demonstrate experience. However, indicative numbers delineating minimum desirable experience may incentivise exaggeration or misrepresentation of experience. This study aimed to determine perceptions of real-world eLogbook use among UK surgeons in training. MATERIAL AND METHODS: An anonymous online questionnaire was disseminated electronically using a pre-planned yield-maximisation strategy, incorporating regional champions, email and social media. Evaluation employed mixed methods in a combined interpretation of quantitative and qualitative data from the questionnaire. Recommendations for development of the eLogbook were itemised from respondents' free text items and a modified Delphi process, conducted within the Council of the UK national trainee representative body, the Association of Surgeons in Training, determined the strength of each recommendation. RESULTS: Analysis included 906 complete responses from training-grade surgeons (34.8% female) from all UK recognised specialties and all grades of training. More than two-thirds (68.5%) believed that overstatement or misrepresentation of case involvement occurs. A fifth (20.8%) reported witnessing trainees logging cases they had not actually participated in and almost a third (32.7%) had witnessed overstatement, yet few (15.1%) had raised such an issue with a supervisor. Most (85.2%) respondents had few or no eLogbook entries validated. More than a quarter of respondents felt pressure to overstate their involvement in cases (28.6%) and the number recorded (28.1%). Almost a third (31.5%) felt the required case number for completion of training was not achievable. Female trainees were less likely to feel well supervised (p = 0.022) and to perceive targets for completion of training were achievable (p = 0.005). Thematic analysis identified four key themes to explain logbook misuse: Pressure to achieve training milestones; eLogbook functionality issues; training deficiencies and probity. CONCLUSIONS: Inaccurate operative recording was widely reported, primarily in response to perceived pressure to achieve targets for career progression. Operative logbooks may not be as accurate as intended. Consensus recommendations are made for improvement in the eLogbook and its use.

Simulation in surgical training: Prospective cohort study of access, attitudes and experiences of surgical trainees in the UK and Ireland.

BACKGROUND: Surgical training is evolving, and simulation is becoming more important as a way to expedite the early learning curve and augment surgical techniques. With novel technology, and innovation, major changes are possible in how surgeons are trained. The integration of these concepts into the surgical curriculum may drive up educational standards and enhance patient safety. This survey sought to determine surgical trainees views on the current place of simulation in surgical training and explore their vision for the future. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a prospective, questionnaire-based cross-sectional study by *** and the ***, England. Surgical trainees were surveyed about their experiences of simulation during their training through an electronic questionnaire distributed in the UK and Republic of Ireland through mailing lists of RCS and ***. Quantitative and qualitative research methodology was used. RESULTS: Of 462 surveys submitted, a total of 323 were fully completed and included in the analysis. Core Surgical Trainees represented 28.4% of respondents. The vast majority of respondents (98.9%) considered that simulation training was important, however 55.0% felt it was delivered inadequately. 86.2% wanted greater access to simulation training: Less than half of respondents had access to simulation training at their current place of work or had simulation incorporated into their formal teaching programme (42.4% and 41.6% respectively). CONCLUSION: This study highlights the importance of simulation to trainees. Delivery and accessibility of simulation training varies widely. We highlight areas for improvement and best practice. In a culture of accountability, where patient safety is our highest priority, a "see one, do one, teach one" approach to training is no longer appropriate; instead we must utilise available simulation tools to augment learning.

Designing a comprehensive Non-Communicable Diseases (NCD) programme for hypertension and diabetes at primary health care level: evidence and experience from urban Karnataka, South India.

BACKGROUND: India accounts for more than two-third of mortality due to non-communicable diseases (NCDs) in south-east Asia. The burden is high in Karnataka, one of the largest states in southern India. There is a need for integration of disease prevention, health promotion, treatment and care within the national program at primary level. A public-private partnership initiative explored evidence gaps to inform a health system based, integrated NCD programme across care continuum with a focus on hypertension and diabetes. METHODS: The study was conducted during 2017-18 in urban parts of Mysore city, covering a population of 58,000. Mixed methods were used in the study; a population-based screening to estimate denominators for those with disease and at risk; cross-sectional surveys to understand distribution of risk factors, treatment adherence and out of pocket expenses; facility audits to assess readiness of public and private facilities; in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to understand practices, myths and perceptions in the community. Chi-square tests were used to test differences between the groups. Framework analysis approach was used for qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Twelve and 19% of the adult population had raised blood sugar and blood pressure, respectively, which increased with age, to 32 and 44% for over 50 years. 11% reported tobacco consumption; 5.5%, high alcohol consumption; 40%, inadequate physical activity and 81%, inappropriate diet consumption. These correlated strongly with elderly age and poor education. The public facilities lacked diagnostics and specialist services; care in the private sector was expensive. Qualitative data revealed fears and cultural myths that affected treatment adherence. The results informed intervention design across the NCD care continuum. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides tools and methodology to gather evidence in designing comprehensive NCD programmes in low and middle income settings. The study also provides important insights into public-private partnership driving effective NCD care at primary care level.

Prospective cohort study of surgical trainee experience of access to gastrointestinal endoscopy training in the UK and Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical trainees are reporting barriers to training in gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. This snapshot survey aimed to gather data on variation in access to quality GI endoscopy training for Colorectal and Upper Gastrointestinal (GI) surgical trainees across the UK and Ireland. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An online 20-point survey was designed and distributed nationally to surgical trainee members of the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT), Dukes and The Roux Group (formerly Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland Trainees). The survey was designed in collaboration with The Roux Group for Upper GI trainees and the Dukes' Club for Colorectal trainees. RESULTS: 218 responses were received, most with a Colorectal or Upper GI sub-specialty interest (colorectal 56.0%; upper GI surgery 25.7%). Only 28.6% of trainees attended a dedicated training endoscopy list at least once a week with 28.1% not attending any at all. Less than half of trainees reported having endoscopy formally timetabled on rotas (36.9%). Most trainees (88.0%) encountered difficulties in gaining endoscopy training including lack of available lists (77.2%), conflicting operative commitments (59.4%), preferential allocation of lists to gastroenterology trainees (57.9%) and resistance from endoscopy departmental leads (38.6%). Regarding JAG accreditation, 77.1% respondents felt it should be mandatory prior to CCT with 80.3% believing this would lead to better access to dedicated endoscopy training equivalent to gastroenterology trainees. 93.1% trainees felt that attaining JAG accreditation by surgical trainees was important to patient care. DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates significant barriers in accessing GI endoscopy training for general surgical trainees which urgently needs to be improved. In order to meet JAG training requirements for surgical trainees, a multifaceted collaborative approach from surgical and gastroenterology training bodies, local JAG trainers and the General Surgery SAC and JCST is required. This is to ensure that endoscopy is promoted and a robust model of training is successfully designed and delivered to general surgery trainees.

Stoma rods in abdominal surgery: a systematic review and metaanalyses.

BACKGROUND: Stoma rods are used traditionally to prevent retraction of loop stomas into the abdominal cavity. However, there is very little evidence to support or refute their use. The aim of the present systematic review and metaanalysis was to assess the current data on stoma rods in loop stomas. The primary outcomes were stoma necrosis and stoma retraction. METHODS: A systematic review and metaanalyses were conducted using the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalysis guidelines (PRISMA). The study protocol was registered prospectively on PROSPERO. An electronic search was performed by two reviewers independently using predefined search strategy and Medline. Bibliographies of selected studies were screened for additional references. RevMan was used to generate forest plots and calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In total, five studies were identified that met inclusion criteria, including four randomized controlled trials. Three studies examined only ileostomies, while one included both colostomies and ileostomies, and one only examined colostomies. In total, 561 patients underwent a stoma with a rod compared to 443 without. There was a higher rate of dermatitis (rod 29.86% vs no rod 16% OR 2.65; 95% CI 1.79-3.93) and stoma necrosis (rod 7% vs no rod 1.15% OR 5.58; 95% CI 1.85-16.84) in the rod group, but there was no significant difference in stoma retraction (rod 2.28% vs no rod 3.45%; OR 0.7; 95% CI 0.32-1.54). CONCLUSIONS: Stoma rods do not reduce the incidence of stoma retraction and instead lead to increased rates of dermatitis and stoma necrosis.

Attracting medical students and doctors into surgical training in the UK and Ireland.

AIMS: Core surgical training (CST) programmes in the UK have seen a significant reduction in competition ratios over the past five years. This study aimed to determine motivating factors and perceived barriers to pursuing a career in surgery amongst junior doctors in training and medical students attending an annual conference. METHODS: A self-reported, electronic questionnaire was distributed to medical students, foundation year doctors, and doctors in postgraduate surgical training programmes (DIPST) who attended the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) Conference in 2016. Respondents ranked factors attracting them to a career in surgery and factors that could improve perceptions of surgical careers. Chi-square test was used to test for differences between groups (a = 0.05, R Studio, V3.3.1). RESULTS: Of 394 respondents (response rate = 50.9%), 44.9% were medical students or foundation doctors ('Pre-CST') and 55.1% were DIPST ('Peri/post-CST'). Practical application of skills (97.4%), enjoyment of the theatre environment (95.4%) and positive experiences in surgical firms (84.7%) were primary driving factors towards a surgical career. Availability of private practice (32.2%), and sustainability of consultant jobs (49.0%) had less influence. For 'Pre-CST' respondents, role models (82.8% pre-CST v 74.9% peri-post CST, p < 0.05) and defined career progression (67.2% pre-CST v 47.0% peri-post CST, p < 0.001) were particularly important. 91% of all respondents agreed that a better balance of training and service within worked hours would improve perceptions of surgery. CONCLUSION: Addressing the motivating factors and perceived barriers to surgical careers will help bolster recruitment of the future surgical workforce.

Nurturing Excellence: Association of Surgeons in Training Annual Conference 2018 Edinburgh.

The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT)'s motto is the pursuit of excellence in surgical training. The Association provides support to surgical trainees throughout the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Originally founded in 1976, ASiT is independent of the National Health Service (NHS), Surgical Royal Colleges, and specialty associations. The 2018 Annual Conference in Edinburgh hosted over 800 delegates for a packed educational weekend. The conference theme was #nurturingexcellence and focused on helping trainees achieve their potential and improve surgical care. The importance of support for diversity in surgery was emphasised. An inclusive approach was fostered with a baby feeding room and a clear message that babies were welcome at the conference. Debates on the role of simulation in surgical training, sessions on reflective practice and the improving surgical training programme and a question and answer session with the presidents of the Royal colleges of surgeons made for lively and at times heated discussions. The weekend started with pre-conference courses covering a diverse range of topics including core laparoscopic, vascular, orthopaedics, neurosurgical skills, leadership, NOTSS and global surgery. Over 1000 abstract submissions were received and there were over 30 prize winning submissions. ASiT continues to grow and we look forward to an even larger and more successful international conference next year in Belfast 22nd-24th March, with an exciting parallel Hackathon to foster cross specialty cooperation to solve surgical problems.

Perceptions of the Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP) in surgical training in the UK and Ireland: A prospective cross sectional questionnaire study.

BACKGROUND: Surgical trainees in the UK and Ireland undergo rigorous formative and summative assessments throughout each placement, and appraisal at an Annual Review of Competence Progression (ARCP). The ARCP evaluates performance during each training year and determines progression to the next year of training. It is critical that the ARCP is a robust and fair process. The Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) sought to evaluate surgical trainees' experiences of the ARCP process in order to identify areas for improvement. METHODS: An electronic survey was developed and distributed electronically to the trainee membership of ASiT in the UK and Republic of Ireland. A 57 point survey examined the specifics of one ARCP cycle as well as attitudes to the process in general. Quantitative analysis was performed, along with thematic analysis on the free-text comments. RESULTS: 600 trainees from all deaneries, grades and specialities participated. The survey demonstrated difficulties in preparing for ARCP: insufficient notice (24%), inadequate communication (22%) and lack of engagement of seniors (30-39%). 47% considered the process and standards inconsistent. 82% of trainees considered a face-to-face ARCP advantageous. Such a meeting provided a means of raising concerns regarding training posts (29%), bullying (18%) and patient safety (17%) that would not otherwise have been reported in writing. During qualitative analysis, the following themes emerged: The conflict between potential value and real experience; concerns regarding the quality of assessment and the need for improvement (in process, individual performance and surgical training.) CONCLUSION: This survey demonstrates that trainees appreciate the potential educational value of the ARCP process. However, there is a gap between this potential and trainees experience. Particular concerns include inconsistency, the timing of decision-making and the need to retain a face-to-face meeting. This feedback from trainees can be used to improve the assessment process in relation to procedural developments at the national level and engagement of supervisors and trainers locally. These changes will ensure that the ARCP becomes a higher quality assessment and more constructive for training in future.

Effects of CDX2 on prognosis and chemotherapy responsiveness in mismatch repair-deficient colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Caudal-related homeobox transcription factor 2 (CDX2) is an intestine-specific transcription factor implicated in tumour differentiation, proliferation, cell adhesion and migration. Negative CDX2 status (CDX2-) is associated with worse prognosis in colorectal cancer and may identify high-risk stage II disease that benefits from adjuvant chemotherapy. This observational study investigated whether CDX2- is associated with prognosis or response to chemotherapy in the mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) phenotype of colorectal cancer. METHODS: Patients with resectable dMMR colorectal cancer were eligible for inclusion. The prognostic and predictive value of CDX2 expression on the presence of lymph node metastasis (LNM) and survival was investigated. CDX2 status was determined via immunohistochemistry using the Leica Bond™ CDX2 (clone EP25) ready-to-use primary antibody. RESULTS: Some 235 of 238 consecutive dMMR tumours were assessed for CDX2 status. CDX2- was observed in 15·7 per cent of colorectal cancer. Interobserver agreement was excellent (κ = 0·863; P < 0·001). CDX2- was significantly associated with female sex, increased size, advanced stage, worse conventional and poorly differentiated cluster (PDC) grade, mucinous morphology, perineural and lymphovascular invasion, and pN status (all P ≤ 0·038). CDX2- was not associated with LNM or survival in multivariable analysis. Independent predictors of LNM were PDC grade (odds ratio (OR) 4·12, 95 per cent c.i. 1·76 to 9·63; P = 0·001) and extramural venous invasion (OR 3·79, 1·62 to 8·85; P = 0·002). Budding (hazard ratio (HR) 2·79, 95 per cent c.i. 1·60 to 4·87; P < 0·001), pT status (HR 3·59, 1·29 to 10·01; P = 0·015) and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 2·07, 1·15 to 3·74; P = 0·016) were independently associated with worse disease-free survival. CONCLUSION: CDX2- does not confer a worse prognosis in the dMMR phenotype of colorectal cancer. The MMR status of patients with colorectal cancer should be determined before assessing CDX2 status.

Supporting doctors as healthcare quality and safety advocates: Recommendations from the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT).

BACKGROUND: As front-line healthcare staff, doctors in surgical training occupy a unique organisational space rotating through hospitals and services in which they witness first hand both good and bad practice. This puts trainees in a clear position to identify and raise patient safety issues, and to contribute to discussions regarding quality and safety improvement. However, there are a number of real and perceived barriers to trainees doing so. These include concerns about the impact on training assessments and career progression, and uncertainty about the appropriate route. METHODS: Paper-based survey of delegates attending the Association of Surgeons in Training (ASiT) conference (response rate 73%; 479/652). RESULTS: 288 (60%) of trainees reported previous concerns over practices and behaviour of colleagues that might pose risks to patient care including concerns over poor performance (n = 243; 84%), bullying (n = 45; 16%), alcohol and drug abuse (n = 15; 5%) and mental health problems (n = 8; 3%). However, 53% (n = 153) did not escalate these concerns. 178 (37%) of trainees also reported concerns over hospital policies, protocols or systems that might pose a risk to patient care, with 46% (n = 82) not escalating such concerns. Respondents highlighted fear of personal vilification or reprisal (n = 224; 47%), fear of impact on career (n = 206; 43%) and a lack of confidence in the process (n = 170; 36%) as barriers to whistleblowing. More senior trainees were significantly more likely to raise concerns than more junior grades (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: These results highlight worrying issues around reporting concerns, with trainees often "silent witnesses" to poor performance in healthcare. Adverse events must provide opportunities for learning to improve future outcomes. Herein, ASiT proposes 14 recommendations to improve protection for trainees in raising patient safety concerns. These include the creation of a positive workplace culture, promoting the active involvement of trainees in quality improvement discussions, with clear mechanisms for trainees to raise concerns.