The impact of robotic rectal cancer surgery at a Canadian regional cancer centre: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although robotic surgery has several advantages over other minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques for rectal cancer surgery, the uptake in Canada has been limited owing to a perceived increase in cost and lack of training. The objective of this study was to determine the impact of access to robotic surgery in a Canadian setting. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study involving consecutive adults undergoing surgical resection for rectal cancer between 2017 and 2020. The primary exposure was access to robotic surgery. Outcomes included MIS utilization, short-term outcomes, total cost of care, and quality of surgical resection. We completed univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: We included 171 individuals in this cohort study (85 in the prerobotic period and 86 in the robotic period). The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. A higher proportion of individuals underwent successful MIS in the robotic phase (86% v. 46%, p < 0.001). Other benefits included a shorter mean length of hospital stay (5.1 d v. 9.2 d, p < 0.001). The quality of surgical resection was similar between groups. The total cost of care was $16 746 in the robotic period and $18 808 in the prerobotic period (mean difference -$1262, 95% confidence interval -$4308 to $1783; p = 0.4). CONCLUSION: Access to robotic rectal cancer surgery increased successful completion of MIS and shortened hospital stay, with a similar total cost of care. Robotic rectal cancer surgery can enhance patient outcomes in the Canadian setting.

Early predictive factors and risk assessment for anastomotic leakage in patients undergoing low anterior resection for rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Anastomotic leakage is a complication that creates significant concern in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality after colorectal surgery. This study aimed to identify variables for detecting anastomotic leakage in those who had open, laparoscopic, or robotic low anterior resection for cancer and to explore their relationships. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 283 patients who were diagnosed with rectal cancer and underwent low anterior resection were divided into two groups: those with and without anastomotic leakage. Demographic and clinical data were analyzed. Anastomotic leakage was detected in 23 of 283 patients who underwent low anterior resection. RESULTS: The postoperative analysis of the biochemical data of the patients showed statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of C-reactive protein (Crp), albumin, lymphocytes, leukocytes, neutrophils, and their ratio. The performance of these parameters in predicting anastomotic leakage was statistically analyzed in the patient group with anastomotic leakage, and nomogram results were acquired. Immune system components and biomarkers were statistically tested, and nomogram results were obtained in rectal cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: These parameters can be used together as a potential marker in anastomotic leakage. Further development of these variables has the potential to facilitate the timely detection and treatment of anastomotic leakage.

Comparative analysis of preoperative chemoradiotherapy and upfront surgery in the treatment of upper-half rectal cancer: oncological benefits, surgical outcomes, and cost implications.

The value of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is not absolutely clear for upper-half (> 7-15 cm) rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of radical surgery with preoperative CRT vs. upfront surgery (US) in Chinese patients with stage II and III upper-half rectal cancer. A total of 809 patients with locally advanced upper-half rectal cancer between 2017 and 2021 were enrolled retrospectively (280 treated with CRT and 529 treated with US). Through 1:1 propensity score matching, the CRT (172 patients) and US (172 patients) groups were compared for short-term postoperative results and long-term oncological and functional outcomes. In the entire cohort, patients in the CRT group had a younger age, lower distance from the anal verge (DAV), and higher rates of cT4 stage, cN2 stage, mrCRM positivity, EMVI positivity, CEA elevation, and CA-199 elevation than those in the US group. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) was lower in the CRT group than in the US group (76% vs. 84%, p = 0.022), while the 5-year overall survival (OS) was comparable between the two groups (85% and 88%, p = 0.084). The distant metastasis rate was higher in the CRT group than in the US group (12.5% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.028), though the local recurrence rate was similar between the two groups (1.1% and 1.3%, p = 1.000). After performing PSM, the 5-year OS (86% vs. 88% p = 0.312), the 5-year DFS (79% vs. 80%, p = 0.435), the local recurrence rate (1.2% vs. 1.7%, p = 1.000), and the distant metastasis rate (11.0% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.593) were comparable between the two groups. Notable pathological downstaging was observed in the CRT group, with a pathological complete response (PCR) rate of 14.5%. In addition, patients in the CRT group had a lower proportion of pT3 (61.6% vs. 77.9%, p < 0.001), pN + (pN1, 15.1% vs. 30.2%, pN2, 9.3% vs. 20.3%, p < 0.001), stage III (24.4% vs. 50.6%, p < 0.001), perineural invasion (19.8% vs. 32.0%, p = 0.014), and lymphovascular invasion (9.3% vs. 25.6%, p < 0.001) than those in the US group. Postoperative complications and long-term functional results were similar, yet there was a trend toward a higher conversion to laparotomy rate (5 (2.9%) vs. 0 (0.0%), p = 0.061) and higher rates of robotic surgery (11.6% vs. 4.7%, p < 0.001), open surgery (7.0% vs. 0.6%, p < 0.001), diverting stoma (47.1% vs. 25.6%, p < 0.001), and surgery costs (1473.6 ± 106.5 vs. 1140.3 ± 54.3$, p = 0.006) in the CRT group. In addition, EMVI (OR = 2.516, p = 0.001) was the only independent risk factor associated with poor response to CRT, and in subgroup analysis of EMVI + , CRT group patients presented a lower 5-year DFS (72.9% vs. 80.5%, p = 0.025) compared to US group patients. CRT prior to surgery has no additional oncological benefits over US in the treatment of upper-half rectal cancer. In contrast, CRT is associated with increased rates of conversion to laparotomy, stoma creation and higher surgery costs. Surgeons tend to favor robotic surgery in the treatment of complex cases such as radiated upper-half rectal cancers. Notably, EMVI + patients with upper-half rectal cancer should be encouraged to undergo upfront surgery, as preoperative CRT may not provide benefits and may lead to delayed treatment effects.

Intersphincteric resection following robotic-assisted versus laparoscopy-assisted total mesorectal excision for middle and low rectal cancer: a multicentre propensity score analysis of 1571 patients.

BACKGROUND: Robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision (RaTME) may be associated with reduced conversion to an open approach and a higher rate of complete total mesorectal excision (TME); however, studies on its advantages in intersphincteric resection (ISR) are inadequate. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter cohort study enroled consecutive patients who underwent RaTME and laparoscopy-assisted total mesorectal excision (LaTME) at four medical centres between January 2020 and March 2023. Propensity score matching (PSM), inverse probability of treatment weight (IPTW), and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed. The primary outcome was the ISR rate. Secondary outcomes were coloanal anastomosis (CAA), conversion to open surgery, conversion to transanal TME, abdominoperineal resection, postoperative morbidity and mortality within 30 days, and pathological outcomes. RESULTS: Among the 1571 patients, 1211 and 450 underwent LaTME and RaTME, respectively, with corresponding ISR incidences of 5.3% and 8.4% ( P =0.024). After PSM and IPTW, RaTME remained associated with higher ISR rates (4.5% versus 9.4%, P =0.022 after PSM; 4.9% versus 9.2, P =0.005 after IPTW). This association remained in multivariate analysis after adjusting for other confounding factors. RaTME was further associated with a higher CAA rate, longer operating time, and higher hospitalization expenses. CONCLUSIONS: RaTME may facilitate ISR in middle and low rectal cancers, showing an independent association with a higher ISR incidence, with pathological outcomes and complications comparable to those of LaTME. However, it may also require a longer operating time and incur higher hospitalization expenses.

Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment.

PURPOSE: Surgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics. METHODS: Pseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ). RESULTS: Ninety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE. CONCLUSIONS: Application and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.

Validity assessment of the POLARS score tool in the prediction of post rectal cancer surgery LARS score in a population-based Swedish cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) is one of the most common functional impairments after rectal cancer surgery with a high impact on quality of life. The Pre-Operative LARS score (POLARS) nomogram and its online tool has been developed to predict the degree of postoperative LARS. The aim of this study was to analyse how accurately the POLARS score could predict LARS scores when compared with actual patient-reported LARS (PR-LARS) scores in a population-based Swedish cohort. DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study included patients who underwent curative rectal cancer surgery between 2007 and 2013 in Stockholm County and were identified using the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR). Information regarding preoperative risk factors, patient and treatment characteristics, and presence of LARS postoperatively were collected from patient charts, SCRCR and patient questionnaires. The POLARS model formula was used to predict LARS scores, which then were compared with the actual PR-LARS scores. Individual LARS score differences between the two estimates were shown with a modified Bland-Altman plot of difference. RESULTS: The cohort included 477 patients, of whom 359 (75%) of patients were categorised as having no/minor LARS based on the POLARS score. The correctly identified patients by the POLARS score were 80/255 (31%) in the major LARS group and 184/222 (83%) no/minor LARS group. The sensitivity was 31% for major LARS and the positive predictive value was 68%. CONCLUSION: The POLARS score has a low sensitivity for major LARS in this Swedish cohort. Other methods to predict the risk of LARS need to be developed.

From burden to relief: The economic and quality-of-life advantages of pseudo continent perineal colostomy in ultra-low rectal cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Pseudo Continent Perineal Colostomy (PCPC) is an alternative technique to left iliac colostomy (LIC) after abdominoperineal resection for ultra low rectal cancer (ULRC). It allows placing the stoma in the perineum to preserve patients' body image. However, concerns about its impact on quality of life and management costs have limited its adoption. We aimed to compare the early outcomes and financial burden of PCPC and LIC in ULRC patients in Morocco, a low-middle-income country. METHODS: From January 2018 to December 2019, all patients who underwent abdomino-perineal resection (APR) with LIC or PCPC were prospectively enrolled. For each patient, baseline characteristics, and in hospital and 90 days morbidity with a focus on perineal complications were reported. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the validated EORTC-C30 and CR29 questionnaires. Financial burden to patients was reported using declarative out-of-pocket costs (OOPC) analysis. RESULTS: Among 49 patients who underwent APR, 33 received PCPC and 16 received definitive LIC. Similar rates of early perineal complications were observed between the two groups (p = 0.49). Readmission rate at POD90 was higher in the LIC-group due to perineal sepsis (p = 0.09). QOL analysis at 6 months revealed that patients with PCPC had a higher global health status (p = 0.006), a better physical functioning and reported fewer symptoms of flatulence and fecal incontinence (p = 0.001). Patients with a LIC reported more financial difficulties with higher median OOPC of stoma management up to €23 versus €0 per month for PCPC (p = 0.0024). PCPC was the only predictive factor of improved patient reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: PCPC is a cost-effective alternative to the standard definitive colostomy without alteration of the QOL or additional perineal complications during the first 6 months following the surgery. These findings may help convince surgeons to offer this option to patients refusing definitive LIC.

Light and shadow of watch-and-wait strategy in rectal cancer: oncological result, clinical outcomes, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: The watch-and-wait (WW) strategy is a potential option for patients with rectal cancer who obtain a complete clinic response after neoadjuvant therapy. The aim of this study is to analyze the long-term oncological outcomes and perform a cost-effectiveness analysis in patients undergoing this strategy for rectal cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data of patients treated with the WW strategy were prospectively collected from January 2015 to January 2020. A control group was created, matched 1:1 from a pool of 480 patients undergoing total mesorectal excision. An independent company carried out the financial analysis. Clinical and oncological outcomes were analyzed in both groups. Outcome parameters included surgical and follow-up costs, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and the incremental cost per QALY gained or the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). RESULTS: Forty patients were included in the WW group, with 40 patients in the surgical group. During a median follow-up period of 36 months, metastasis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar in the two groups. In the WW group, nine (22%) local regrowths were detected in the first 2 years. The permanent stoma rate was slightly higher after salvage surgery in the WW group compared to the surgical group (48.5% vs 20%, p < 0.01). The cost-effectiveness analysis was slightly better for the WW group, especially for low rectal cancer compared to medium-high rectal cancer (ICER = - 108,642.1 vs ICER = - 42,423). CONCLUSIONS: The WW strategy in locally advanced rectal cancer offers similar oncological outcomes with respect to the surgical group and excellent results in quality of life and cost outcomes, especially for low rectal cancer. Nonetheless, the complex surgical field during salvage surgery can lead to a high permanent stoma rate; therefore, the careful selection of patients is mandatory.

Costs Related to Diverting Ileostomy After Rectal Cancer Surgery: A Population-Based Healthcare Cost Analysis Based on Nationwide Registers.

Low anterior resection for rectal cancer often includes a diverting loop-ileostomy to avoid the severe consequences of anastomotic leakage. Reversal of the stoma is often delayed, which can incur health-care costs on different levels. The aim is to, on population basis, determine stoma-related costs, and to investigate habitual and socioeconomic factors associated to the level of cost. Multi-register design with data from the Swedish Rectal Cancer Registry, the National Prescribed Drug Register, Statistics Sweden and cost-administrative data from the National Board of Health and Welfare. Data was gathered for 3564 patients with rectal cancer surgery 2007 to 2013, for 3 years following the surgery. Factors influencing the cost of inpatient care and stoma-related consumables were assessed with linear regression analyses. All monthly costs were higher for females (consumables P < .001 and in-patient care P = .031). Post-secondary education (P = .003) and younger age (P = .020) was associated with a higher cost for consumables while suffering a surgical complication was associated with increased cost for inpatient care (P < .001). Patients who had their stoma longer had lower monthly costs (consumables P < .001 and in-patient care P < .001). Female gender, longer duration of stoma, young age, and higher education are associated with higher costs for the care of a diverting stoma after rectal cancer surgery. This study does not allow for analyses of causality but the results together with deepened analyses of underlying reasons form a proper basis for decisions in health care planning and allocation of resources. These findings may have implications on the debate of equal care for all.

Risk assessment of rectal anastomotic leakage (RAREAL) after DIXON in non-emergency patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: The routine establishment of a diverting stoma (DS) remains controversial in every patient undergoing Dixon operation. We aimed to establish a model for the risk assessment of rectal anastomotic leak (RAREAL) after Dixon in non-emergency patients with rectal cancer, using routinely available variables, by which surgeons could individualize their approach to DS. METHODS: 323 patients who underwent Dixon operation for rectal cancer from January 2015 to December 2018 were taken as the model group for retrospective study. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to determine the independent risk factors associated with anastomotic leakage. We constructed the RAREAL model. 150 patients who underwent Dixon operation due to rectal cancer from January 2019 to December 2020 were collected according to the uniform criteria as a validation group to validate the RAREAL model. RESULTS: In the model group, multivariable analysis identified the following variables as independent risk factors for AL: HbA1c (odds ratio (OR) = 4.107; P = 0.044), Left colic artery (LCA) non preservation (OR = 4.360; P = 0.026), Tumor distance from the anal margin (TD) (OR = 6.373; P = 0.002). In the model group, the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) for evaluating AL with RAREAL was 0.733, and when RAREAL score = 2.5, its sensitivity, specificity and Youden index were 0.385, 0.973, 0.358, respectively. The AUC was 0.722 in the validation group and its sensitivity and specificity were 0.333 and 0.985, respectively, when RAREAL score = 2.5. CONCLUSION: The RAREAL score can be used to assess the risk of AL after Dixon operation for rectal cancer, and prophylactic DS should be proactively done when the score is greater than 2.5.

Specialty-Certified Colorectal Surgeons Demonstrate Favorable Short-term Surgical Outcomes for Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection: Assessment of a Japanese Nationwide Database.

BACKGROUND: There are few studies on the impact of a colorectal-specific technically certified surgeon on good surgical outcomes for laparoscopic low anterior resection in the real world. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic low anterior resection with the participation of a certified colorectal surgeon. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese nationwide database. SETTING: This study was conducted as a project for the Japan Society of Endoscopic Surgery and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery. PATIENTS: This study included 41,741 patients listed in the National Clinical Database who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection performed by certified, noncertified, and colorectal-specific certified surgeons, according to the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System, from 2016 to 2018. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Operative mortality rate and anastomotic leak rate were the primary outcome measures. RESULTS: Overall 30-day mortality and operative mortality were 0.2% and 0.3%, respectively, without significant differences between all kinds of certified and noncertified surgeon groups. Overall anastomotic leak rate was 9.3%, with a significant difference between the 2 groups. Colorectal- and stomach-certified groups had lower 30-day mortality and operative mortality than the biliary-certified and noncertified groups. The anastomotic leak rate was the lowest in the colorectal-certified group. Based on a logistic regression analysis using the risk-adjusted model, operative mortality was significantly higher in the biliary-certified group than in the colorectal-certified group. Moreover, anastomotic leak rate was significantly lower in the colorectal-certified group than in the stomach-certified and noncertified groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was a retrospective study, and there was a possibility of different definitions of anastomotic leak due to the use of a nationwide database. CONCLUSIONS: The participation of a colorectal-specific certified surgeon may decrease the risk of operative mortality and anastomotic leak for laparoscopic low anterior resection. CIRUJANO COLORRECTAL ALTAMENTE CALIFICADO PROVOCA RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS FAVORABLES A CORTO PLAZO PARA LA RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA LAPAROSCPICA EVALUACIN DE LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL JAPONESA: ANTECEDENTES:Hay pocos estudios sobre el impacto de un cirujano certificado técnicamente especializado en cáncer colorrectal con un buen resultado quirúrgico para la resección anterior baja laparoscópica en el mundo real.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los resultados a corto plazo de la resección anterior baja laparoscópica con la participación de un cirujano colorrectal certificado.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo que utilizó una base de datos nacional japonesa.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó como un proyecto para la Sociedad Japonesa de Cirugía Endoscópica y la Sociedad Japonesa de Cirugía Gastroenterológica.PACIENTES:este estudio incluyó a 41 741 pacientes incluidos en la base de datos clínica nacional que se sometieron a una resección anterior baja laparoscópica realizada por cirujanos certificados, no certificados y certificados específicamente colorrectales, según el Sistema de calificación de habilidades quirúrgicas endoscópicas de 2016 a 2018.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La tasa de mortalidad operatoria y la tasa de fuga anastomótica fueron los resultados primarios.RESULTADOS:La mortalidad general a los 30 días y la mortalidad operatoria fueron del 0,2 % y el 0,3 %, respectivamente, sin diferencias significativas entre los grupos de todos los tipos de cirujanos certificados y no certificados. La tasa global de fuga anastomótica fue del 9,3 %, con una diferencia significativa entre los dos grupos. Los grupos con certificación colorrectal y estomacal tuvieron una mortalidad a los 30 días y una mortalidad operatoria más bajas que los grupos con certificación biliar y sin certificación. La tasa de fuga anastomótica fue la más baja en el grupo certificado colorrectal. Con base en un análisis de regresión logística utilizando el modelo ajustado por riesgo, la mortalidad operatoria fue significativamente más alta en el grupo con certificación biliar que en el grupo con certificación colorrectal. Además, la tasa de fuga anastomótica fue significativamente más baja en el grupo con certificación colorrectal que en los grupos con certificación estomacal y sin certificación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio fue retrospectivo y existía la posibilidad de diferentes definiciones de fuga anastomótica debido al uso de una base de datos nacional.CONCLUSIONES:La participación de un cirujano certificado en video específico colorrectal puede disminuir el riesgo de mortalidad operatoria y fuga anastomótica para la resección anterior baja laparoscópica. (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

'4-Check' protocol for intraoperative anastomotic assessment during transanal total mesorectal excision: retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage is a major complication following rectal cancer surgery. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of a protocol based on a quadruple intraoperative anastomotic assessment (4-Check) during transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME). METHODS: Patients who underwent TaTME for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis were reviewed and divided into two groups: before (pre-4-Check: April 2015 - April 2019) and after the implementation of the 4-Check protocol (May 2019 - May 2022). This protocol consisted of a multimodal anastomotic integrity assessment, including indocyanine green-evaluation of colonic stump and intraluminal anastomosis perfusion, a reverse air leak test and anastomotic doughnuts assessment. The primary outcome was incidence of clinical and/or radiological anastomotic leakage. The secondary outcome included intraoperative anastomosis defects and repairs and 30-day complication rate. Propensity score matching and multivariable analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 186 patients, 160 were selected: 86 patients in the pre-4-Check and 74 in the 4-Check group. After propensity score matching, there was no difference in postoperative anastomotic leakage (pre-4-Check versus 4-Check: 11.1 per cent versus 7.4 per cent; P = 0.50). However, in the 4-Check group, the intraoperative detection of defects and repairs was significantly increased (P = 0.03), and the number of complications was reduced (pre-4-Check versus 4-Check: 33.3 per cent versus 9.3 per cent, P = 0.004). Multivariable analyses confirmed that the use of the 4-Check protocol, the detection of anastomotic defects and increased albumin levels were associated with a reduced number of complications. CONCLUSION: The 4-Check protocol allowed the intraoperative detection and repair of anastomotic defects. Anastomotic leakage rates were not reduced; however, 30-day complication rates were lower after implementation of this protocol.

[Advances in functional assessment and bowel rehabilitation following intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer].

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) has been performed as an ultimate sphincter-sparing strategy in selected patients with low rectal cancer. Accumulating evidence suggests that ISR may be an interesting alternative to abdominoperineal resection to avoid a permanent stoma without compromising oncological outcomes. However, bowel dysfunction is a most common consequence of ISR not to be neglected. To date, limited clinical research has reported functional and quality of life outcomes according to patient-reported outcome measures. Also, data concerning management of low anterior resection syndrome are scarce due to lack of quality evidence. Therefore, this review provides an up-to-date summary of systematic assessment (including function, quality of life, manometry and morphology) and bowel rehabilitation for ISR patients. Postoperative anal function is often assessed by a combination of scales, including the Incontinence Assessment Scale, the Gastrointestinal Function Questionnaire, the Specific LARS Assessment Scale and the Faecal Diary. The condition-specific Quality of Life Scale is more appropriate for Quality-of-life measures in fecal incontinence after ISR. Patients' physiological function after ISR can be assessed using water- or high-resolution solid-state anorectal manometry. Anatomical and morphological changes can be assessed using defecography and 3D endorectal ultrasound. Electrical stimulation and biofeedback, pelvic floor exercises, rectal balloon training, transanal irrigation and sacral neuromodulation are all options for post-operative rehabilitation.

Cost associated with diverting ostomy after rectal cancer surgery: a transnational analysis.

BACKGROUND: Diverting ileostomy and colostomy after total mesorectal excision reduces the risk of complications related to anastomotic leakages but is associated with a reduction in health-related quality of life and long-term economic consequences that are unknown. Our objective was to estimate the lifetime costs of stoma placement after rectal cancer resection in the U.S., England, and Germany. METHODS: Input parameters were derived from quasi-systematic literature searches. Decision-analytic models with survival from colorectal cancer-adjusted life tables and country-specific stoma reversal proportions were created for the three countries to calculate lifetime costs. Main cost items were stoma maintenance costs and reimbursement for reversal procedures. Discounting was applied according to respective national guidelines. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to explore the impact of parameter uncertainty onto the results. RESULTS: The cohort starting ages and median survival were 63 and 11.5 years for the U.S., 69 years and 8.5 years for England, and 71 and 6.5 years for Germany. Lifetime discounted stoma-related costs were $26,311, £9512, and €10,021, respectively. All three models were most sensitive to the proportion of ostomy reversal, age at baseline, and discount rate applied. CONCLUSION: Conservative model-based projections suggest that stoma care leads to significant long-term costs. Efforts to reduce the number of patients who need to undergo a diverting ostomy could result in meaningful cost savings.

Assessment of bowel movement dysfunction following laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer: a single-center study from Vietnam.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative bowel movement dysfunction is a challenging problem greatly affecting patients' quality of life after low anterior resection. We aimed to evaluate the bowel movement function of patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection for rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective study recruited 82 rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection from July 2018 to July 2020 at 108 Military Central Hospital, Hanoi, Vietnam. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 62.3±11.6 (28-84) years, 54 (65.9%) were males, and 28 (34.1%) were females. Bowel movement function changed significantly after one year: the average score for low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) after three months, six months, and one year was 17.6, 14.0, and 10.6, respectively. The rate of patients with major LARS decreased from 26.8% after three months to 14.6% after one year. The Wexner score also decreased from 5.9 after three months to 3.4 after one year. The rate of patients with normal bowel movement increased from 28.0% after three months to 46.3% after one year. The rate of patients with complete fecal incontinence decreased from 11.0% after three months to 7.3% after one year. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (p=0.017), tumor location (p=0.02), method of anastomosis (p=0.01), and anastomosis location (p=0.000) were risk factors associated with major LARS after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Bowel movement dysfunction in rectal cancer patients undergoing laparoscopic low anterior resection is a common and persistent problem after surgery. However, bowel function gradually recovers over time. Therefore, patients should be monitored and supported for a better quality of life.

Magnetic resonance imaging in preoperative assessment of the mesorectal nodal status of patients with rectal cancer - Can it be trusted?

PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a fundamental diagnostic modality for the evaluation of primary rectal cancer, but MRI assessment of nodal involvement remains a confounding factor. METHOD: This prospective cohort study was conducted to investigate the accuracy of preoperative MRI in the assessment of nodal status by comparing histopathology reports to MRI findings on a node-by-node basis in 69 patients with rectal cancer. RESULTS: Primary surgery was performed in 40 (58.0%) patients; 29 (42.0%) study patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Histopathological examination revealed T1 tumour in 8 (11.6%) patients, T2 tumour in 30 (43.5%), and T3 tumour in 25 (36.2%). In total, 897 lymph nodes (LNs) have been harvested (13.1 ± 5.4 LNs per specimen). There were 77 MRI-suspicious LNs, 21 (27.3%) of which were histologically proven malignant. The sensitivity of MRI for assessing nodal involvement was 51.2% and specificity 93.4%. Of the 28 patients with MRI-suspicious LNs the diagnosis was correct in 42.8%. The MRI accuracy was 33.3% in "primary surgery" subgroup (n = 18, malignant LNs found in 6 patients). Diagnosis of MRI-negative LNs was correct in 90.2% of study patients; malignant nodes were found in 9.8% of patients initially classified as cN0. CONCLUSIONS: MRI prediction of nodal status in patients with rectal cancer has very low accuracy. Decisions regarding neoadjuvant CRT should not be based on MRI assessment of nodal status, but on the MRI evaluation of tumour depth invasion (T stage and relationship between the tumour and mesorectal fascia).

Economic analysis of open versus laparoscopic versus robot-assisted versus transanal total mesorectal excision in rectal cancer patients: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: Minimally invasive total mesorectal excision is increasingly being used as an alternative to open surgery in the treatment of patients with rectal cancer. This systematic review aimed to compare the total, operative and hospitalization costs of open, laparoscopic, robot-assisted and transanal total mesorectal excision. METHODS: This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement (PRISMA) (S1 File) A literature review was conducted (end-of-search date: January 1, 2023) and quality assessment performed using the Consensus Health Economic Criteria. RESULTS: 12 studies were included, reporting on 2542 patients (226 open, 1192 laparoscopic, 998 robot-assisted and 126 transanal total mesorectal excision). Total costs of minimally invasive total mesorectal excision were higher compared to the open technique in the majority of included studies. For robot-assisted total mesorectal excision, higher operative costs and lower hospitalization costs were reported compared to the open and laparoscopic technique. A meta-analysis could not be performed due to low study quality and a high level of heterogeneity. Heterogeneity was caused by differences in the learning curve and statistical methods used. CONCLUSION: Literature regarding costs of total mesorectal excision techniques is limited in quality and number. Available evidence suggests minimally invasive techniques may be more expensive compared to open total mesorectal excision. High-quality economical evaluations, accounting for the learning curve, are needed to properly assess costs of the different techniques.

Robotic versus laparoscopic proctectomy: a comparative study of short-term economic and clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although several studies compare the clinical outcomes and costs of laparoscopic and robotic proctectomy, most of them reflect the outcomes of the utilisation of older generation robotic platforms. The aim of this study is to compare the financial and clinical outcomes of robotic and laparoscopic proctectomy within a public healthcare system, utilising a multi-quadrant platform. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic and robotic proctectomy between January 2017 and June 2020 in a public quaternary centre were included. Demographic characteristics, baseline clinical, tumour and operative variables, perioperative, histopathological outcomes and costs were compared between the laparoscopic and robotic groups. Simple linear regression and generalised linear model analyses with gamma distribution and log-link function were used to determine the impact of the surgical approach on overall costs. RESULTS: During the study period, 113 patients underwent minimally invasive proctectomy. Of these, 81 (71.7%) underwent a robotic proctectomy. A robotic approach was associated with a lower conversion rate (2.5% versus 21.8%;P = 0.002) at the expense of longer operating times (284 ± 83.4 versus 243 ± 89.8 min;P = 0.025). Regarding financial outcomes, robotic surgery was associated with increased theatre costs (A$23,019 ± 8235 versus A$15,525 ± 6382; P < 0.001) and overall costs (A$34,350 ± 14,770 versus A$26,083 ± 12,647; P = 0.003). Hospitalisation costs were similar between both approaches. An ASA ≥ 3, non-metastatic disease, low rectal cancer, neoadjuvant therapy, non-restorative resection, extended resection, and a robotic approach were identified as drivers of overall costs in the univariate analysis. However, after performing a multivariate analysis, a robotic approach was not identified as an independent driver of overall costs during the inpatient episode (P = 0.1). CONCLUSION: Robotic proctectomy was associated with increased theatre costs but not with increased overall inpatient costs within a public healthcare setting. Conversion was less common for robotic proctectomy at the expense of increased operating time. Larger studies will be needed to confirm these findings and examine the cost-effectiveness of robotic proctectomy to further justify its penetration in the public healthcare system.

Preoperative Radiotherapy Decision-Tree for Rectal Cancer Patients: A Real-World Analysis Based on the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry.

BACKGROUND: There are 3 widely used preoperative radiotherapy (RT) procedures in rectal cancer treatment including long-course RT (LRT), short-course RT with delayed surgery (SRTW), and short-course RT with immediate surgery (SRT). However, further evidence is required to determine which treatment option results in more optimal patient survival. METHODS: This Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry-based retrospective study of real-world data included 7766 stage I-III rectal cancer patients, of which 2982, 1089, 763, and 2932 patients received no RT (NRT), LRT, SRTW, and SRT, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve and Cox proportional hazard multivariate model were used to identify potential risk factors and to examine the independent association of RT with patient survival after adjusting for baseline confounding factors. RESULTS: RT effects on survival differed by age and clinical T stage (cT) subgroups. Subsequent survival analysis by age and cT subgroups confirmed that patients ≥70 years old with cT4 benefited from any RT (P < .001, NRT as reference) and equally from any RT (P > .05 pairwise between RTs). In contrast, for cT3 patients ≥70 years, SRT and LRT were associated with better survival than SRTW (P < .001). In patients <70 years, LRT and SRTW had superior survival benefits in cT4 patients but inferior to SRT (P < .001); SRT was the only effective treatment in the cT3N+ subgroup (P = .032); patients with cT3N0 and <70 years did not benefit from any RT. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that preoperative RT strategies may have varying effects on the survival of rectal cancer patients, depending on their age and clinical stage.

Short-Term Outcomes and Cost-Effectiveness between Long-Course Chemoradiation and Short-Course Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCRT) has been widely recommended in a majority of rectal cancer patients. Recently, encouraging data on short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) for rectal cancer has emerged. In this study, we aimed to compare these two methods in terms of short-term outcomes and cost analysis under the Korean medical insurance system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients with high-risk rectal cancer, who underwent either SCRT or LCRT followed by total mesorectal excision (TME), were classified into two groups. Twenty-seven patients received 5 Gy×5 with two cycles of XELOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m² and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² every 3 weeks) followed by TME (SCRT group). Thirty-five patients received capecitabine-based LCRT followed by TME (LCRT group). Short-term outcomes and cost estimation were assessed between the two groups. RESULTS: Pathological complete response was achieved in 18.5% and 5.7% of patients in the SCRT and LCRT groups, respectively (p=0.223). The 2-year recurrence-free survival rate did not show significant difference between the two groups (SCRT vs. LCRT: 91.9% vs. 76.2%, p=0.394). The average total cost per patient for SCRT was 18% lower for inpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $18787 vs. $22203, p<0.001) and 40% lower for outpatient treatment (SCRT vs. LCRT: $11955 vs. $19641, p<0.001) compared to LCRT. SCRT was shown to be the dominant treatment option with fewer recurrences and fewer complications at a lower cost. CONCLUSION: SCRT was well-tolerated and achieved favorable short-term outcomes. In addition, SCRT showed significant reduction in the total cost of care and distinguished cost-effectiveness compared to LCRT.