Defining Benchmarks for Pelvic Exenteration Surgery: A Multicentre Analysis of Patients with Locally Advanced and Recurrent Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To establish globally applicable benchmark outcomes for pelvic exenteration (PE) in patients with locally advanced primary (LARC) and recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC), using outcomes achieved at highly specialised centres. BACKGROUND DATA: PE is established as the standard of care for selected patients with LARC and LRRC. There are currently no available benchmarks against which surgical performance in PE can be compared for audit and quality improvement. METHODS: This international multicentre retrospective cohort study included patients undergoing PE for LARC or LRRC at 16 highly experienced centres between 2018 and 2023. Ten outcome benchmarks were established in a lower-risk subgroup. Benchmarks were defined by the 75th percentile of the results achieved at the individual centres. RESULTS: 763 patients underwent PE, of which 464 patients (61%) had LARC and 299 (39%) had LRRC. 544 patients (71%) who met predefined lower risk criteria formed the benchmark cohort. For LARC patients, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤44%; comprehensive complication index (CCI): ≤30.2; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤4.3%; R0 resection rate: ≥79%. For LRRC patients, the calculated benchmark threshold for major complication rate was ≤53%; CCI: ≤34.1; 30-day mortality rate: 0%; 90-day mortality rate: ≤6%; R0 resection rate: ≥77%. CONCLUSIONS: The reported benchmarks for PE in patients with LARC and LRRC represent the best available care for this patient group globally and can be used for rigorous assessment of surgical quality and to facilitate quality improvement initiatives at international exenteration centres.

Effectiveness of Prehabilitation Modalities on Postoperative Outcomes Following Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing curative colorectal cancer surgery is high. Prehabilitation has been suggested to reduce postoperative morbidity, however its effectiveness is still lacking. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of prehabilitation in reducing postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive electronic search was conducted in the CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Medline, PsychINFO, AMED, and Embase databases from inception to April 2023. Randomised controlled trials testing the effectiveness of prehabilitation, including exercise, nutrition, and/or psychological interventions, compared with usual care in patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery were included. Two independent review authors extracted relevant information and assessed the risk of bias. Random-effect meta-analyses were used to pool outcomes, and the quality of evidence was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 23 trials were identified (N = 2475 patients), including multimodal (3 trials), exercise (3 trials), nutrition (16 trials), and psychological (1 trial) prehabilitation. There was moderate-quality evidence that preoperative nutrition significantly reduced postoperative infectious complications (relative risk 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.94) and low-quality evidence on reducing the length of hospital stay (mean difference 0.87, 95% CI 0.17-1.58) compared with control. A single trial demonstrated an effect of multimodal prehabilitation on postoperative complication. CONCLUSION: Nutrition prehabilitation was effective in reducing infectious complications and length of hospital stay. Whether other multimodal, exercise, and psychological prehabilitation modalities improve postoperative outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery is uncertain as the current quality of evidence is low. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VW72N ).

Trajectories of Quality of Life After Pelvic Exenteration: A Latent Class Growth Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Information on the course of quality of life after surgery for advanced cancers within the pelvis is important to guide patient decision-making; however, the current evidence is limited. OBJECTIVE: To identify quality-of-life trajectory classes and their predictors after pelvic exenteration. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Highly specialized quaternary pelvic exenteration referral center. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing pelvic exenteration due to advanced/recurrent cancers within the pelvis between July 2008 and July 2022. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Quality-of-life data included the 36-item Short-Form Survey (physical and mental component scores) and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal instruments, which were collected at 11 distinct points from baseline to 5 years postoperatively. Predictors included patient characteristics and surgical outcomes. Latent class analysis was used to identify the likelihood of a better quality-of-life class, and logistic regression models were used to identify predictors of the identified classes. RESULTS: The study included 565 participants. Two distinct quality-of-life trajectory classes were identified for the Physical Component Score (class 1: high stable and class 2: high decreasing). Three distinct classes were identified for the Mental Component Score (class 1: high increasing, class 2: moderate stable, and class 3: moderate decreasing) and for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal total score (class 1: high increasing, class 2: high decreasing, and class 3: low decreasing). Across the 3 quality-of-life domains, overall survival probabilities were also higher in class 1 ( p < 0.0001). Age, repeat exenteration, neoadjuvant therapy, surgical margin, length of operation, and hospital stay were significant predictors of quality-of-life classes. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted at a single highly specialized quaternary pelvic exenteration referral center, and findings may not apply to other centers. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that quality of life after pelvic exenteration diverges into distinct trajectories, with most patients reporting an optimal course. See Video Abstract . TRAYECTORIAS EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA DESPUS DE EXENTERACIN PLVICA ANLISIS DE CRECIMIENTO DE CLASES LATENTES: ANTECEDENTES:La información sobre la evolución en la calidad de vida después de cirugía en cánceres avanzados situados en la pelvis es importante para guiar la toma de decisiones sobre el paciente; sin embargo, la evidencia actual es muy limitada.OBJETIVO:Identificar las clases de trayectorias en la calidad de vida y sus factores pronóstico después de la exenteración pélvica.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohortes prospectivo.AJUSTES:Centro de referencia altamente especializado en la exenteración pélvica cuaternaria.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos sometidos a exenteración pélvica por cáncer avanzados/recurrentes situados en la pelvis entre Julio de 2008 y Julio de 2022.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los datos sobre la calidad de vida incluyeron el Cuestionario de Salud SF-36 (puntuaciones de componentes físicos y mentales) y la evaluación funcional entre la terapia del cáncer/-herramientas colorrectales, recopilados en 11 puntos distintos desde el diagnóstico hasta los 5 años después de la operación.Los predictores incluyeron las características de los pacientes y los resultados quirúrgicos. Se utilizó el análisis de clases latentes para identificar la probabilidad de una mejor calidad de vida y se utilizaron modelos de regresión logística para identificar predictores de las clases identificadas.RESULTADOS:El estudio incluyó a 565 participantes. Se identificaron dos clases distintas de trayectorias de calidad de vida para la puntuación del componente físico (clase 1: alta estable y clase 2: alta decreciente), se identificaron tres clases distintas para la puntuación del componente mental (clase 1: alta creciente; clase 2: moderadamente estable; y clase 3: moderada disminución) y para la evaluación funcional de la terapia contra el cáncer-puntuación total colorrectal (clase 1: aumento alto; clase 2: disminución alta; y clase 3: disminución baja). En los tres dominios de calidad de vida, las probabilidades de supervivencia general también fueron mayores en las clases 1 (p <0,0001). La edad, las exenteraciones pélvicas repetidas, la terapia neoadyuvante, el margen quirúrgico, la duración de la operación y la estadía hospitalaria fueron predictores significativos en las clases de calidad de vida.LIMITACIONES:El presente estudio fué realizado en un único centro de referencia altamente especializado en exenteración pélvica cuaternaria y es posible que los hallazgos no se apliquen a otros centros.CONCLUSIONES:Demostramos con nuestro estudio que la calidad de vida después de la exenteración pélvica diverge en trayectorias distintas, y que la mayoría de los pacientes nos reportaron de una évolución óptima. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo ).

Outcome Heterogeneity in Prehabilitation Trials-Are We Comparing Apples and Oranges?

INTRODUCTION: Over the last decade, the number of prehabilitation randomised controlled trials (RCTs) has increased significantly. Therefore, this review aimed to describe the outcomes reported in prehabilitation RCTs in patients undergoing cancer surgery. METHODS: A search was conducted in Embase, Allied and Complementary Medicine Database, The Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, and Cumulated Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature from inception to July 2021. We included RCTs evaluating the effectiveness of preoperative exercise, nutrition, and psychological interventions on postoperative complications and length of hospital stay in adult oncology patients who underwent thoracic and gastrointestinal cancer surgery. The verbatim outcomes reported in each article were extracted, and each outcome was assessed to determine whether it was defined and measured using a validated tool. Verbatim outcomes were grouped into standardized outcomes and categorized into domains. The quality of outcome reporting in each identified article was assessed using the Harman tool (score range 0-6, where 0 indicated the poorest quality). RESULTS: A total of 74 RCTs were included, from which 601 verbatim outcomes were extracted. Only 110 (18.3%) of the verbatim outcomes were defined and 270 (44.9%) were labeled as either "primary" or "secondary" outcomes. Verbatim outcomes were categorized into 119 standardized outcomes and assigned into one of five domains (patient-reported outcomes, surgical outcomes, physical/functional outcomes, disease activity, and intervention delivery). Surgical outcomes were the most common outcomes reported (n = 71 trials, 95.9%). The overall quality of the reported outcomes was poor across trials (median score: 2.0 [IQR = 0.00-3.75]). CONCLUSIONS: Prehabilitation RCTs display considerable heterogeneity in outcome reporting, and low outcome reporting quality. The development of standardized core outcome sets may help improve article quality and enhance the clinical utility of prehabilitation following cancer surgery.

The health-related quality of life of early-onset colorectal cancer patients: an Australian cross-sectional study.

AIM: Early-onset colorectal cancer (EOCRC) patients are more likely to have advanced disease and undergo more aggressive treatment modalities. However, current literature investigating the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of EOCRC patients is scarce. This study aimed to determine the HRQoL of an Australian cohort of EOCRC patients including a subset who underwent pelvic exenteration (PE) or cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). METHOD: A cross-sectional study of EOCRC patients treated at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney Australia was performed. Patients were divided into groups based on the time interval from their index operation: ≤2 years and >2 years. HRQoL was evaluated using the SF-36v2 questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 50 patients were included. For patients ≤2 years from surgery, the median physical component summary (PCS) and mental health component summary (MCS) scores were 53.3 (36.4-58.9) and 47.3 (37.5-55.7). In the >2 years group, the median PCS and MCS scores were 50.6 (43.3-57.7) and 50.2 (39.04-56.2), respectively. Stage I (vs. stage II) disease and emergency (vs. elective) surgery conferred poorer PCS scores in patients ≤2 years from surgery. No other variables impacted PCS or MCS scores in EOCRC patients in either group. CONCLUSIONS: HRQoL of EOCRC patients was equivocal to the Australian population. Having an earlier stage of diagnosis and emergency index operation was associated with poorer levels of physical functioning in patients ≤2 years from surgery. However, because of the limitations of this study, these findings require validation in future large-scale prospective research.

Patients' and carers' views on research priorities in prehabilitation for cancer surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The views of patients and carers are important for the development of research priorities. This study aimed to determine and compare the top research priorities of cancer patients and carers with those of multidisciplinary clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study surveyed patients recovering from cancer surgery at a major tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia, and/or their carers between March and July 2023. Consenting patients and carers were provided a list of research priorities according to clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation, as determined in a recent International Delphi study. Participants were asked to rate the importance of each research priority using a 5-item Likert scale (ranging from 1 = very high research priority to 5 = very low research priority). RESULTS: A total of 101 patients and 50 carers participated in this study. Four areas were identified as research priorities, achieving consensus of highest importance (> 70% rated as "high" or "very high" priority) by patients, carers, and clinical experts. These were "optimal composition of prehabilitation programs" (77% vs. 82% vs. 88%), "effect of prehabilitation on surgical outcomes" (85% vs. 90% vs. 95%), "effect of prehabilitation on functional outcomes" (83% vs. 86% vs. 79%), and "effect of prehabilitation on patient reported outcomes" (78% vs. 84% vs. 79%). Priorities that did not reach consensus of high importance by patients despite reaching consensus of highest importance by experts included "identifying populations most likely to benefit from prehabilitation" (70% vs. 76% vs. 90%) and "defining prehabilitation core outcome measures" (66% vs. 74% vs. 87%). "Prehabilitation during neoadjuvant therapies" reached consensus of high importance by patients but not by experts or carers (81% vs. 68% vs. 69%). CONCLUSION: This study delineated the primary prehabilitation research priorities as determined by patients and carers, against those previously identified by clinicians with expertise in prehabilitation. It is recommended that subsequent high-quality research and resource allocation be directed towards these highlighted areas of importance.

An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Unimodal Prehabilitation with Exercise Intervention to Enhance Postoperative Outcomes in Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to update the body of evidence on the efficacy of prehabilitation with exercise interventions, in reducing postoperative complications and length of hospital stay after cancer surgery. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, AMED, and PsycINFO to identify randomized controlled trials investigating the impact of prehabilitation with exercise interventions for patients undergoing cancer surgery. Primary and secondary outcomes assessed were postoperative complications and length of hospital stay, respectively. Risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) methodology was used to determine the strength of evidence. Relative risk and mean difference were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: In this updated review, 32 trials (n = 2304 participants) were identified, with 5 trials focused on patients undergoing surgery for genitourinary cancer (n = 422 participants), 9 for lower gastrointestinal cancer (n = 639 participants), 6 for upper gastrointestinal cancer (n = 526), and 11 for lung cancer (n = 717 participants). The majority of included trials exhibited some risk of bias. Evidence of low-to-moderate quality indicated that prehabilitation with preoperative exercise significantly reduced postoperative complication rates by approximately 50% and decreased the length of hospital stay by 2.5 days in patients undergoing lung resection. Preoperative exercise did not demonstrate effectiveness in reducing postoperative complications or length of hospital stay for other cancer populations. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence supports the efficacy of prehabilitation with exercise in reducing postoperative complications and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing lung cancer surgery. Further research is warranted to establish the efficacy of unimodal prehabilitation with exercise in genitourinary, lower gastrointestinal, and upper gastrointestinal cancer populations having cancer surgery.

A review of patient recruitment in randomised controlled trials of preoperative exercise.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard design to determine the effectiveness of an intervention, as the only method of decreasing section bias and minimising random error. However, participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials is a major challenge, with many trials failing to recruit the targeted sample size accordingly to the planned protocol. Thus, the aim of this review is to detail the recruitment challenges of preoperative exercise clinical trials. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, CINAHL, AMED and PsycINFO from inception to July 2021. Randomised controlled trials investigating the effectiveness of preoperative exercise on postoperative complication and/or length of hospital stay in adult cancer patients were included. Main outcomes included recruitment rate, retention rate, number of days needed to screen and recruit one patient and trial recruitment duration. Descriptive statistics were used to summarise outcomes of interest. RESULTS: A total of 27 trials were identified, including 3656 patients screened (N = 21) and 1414 randomised (median recruitment rate (interquartile range) = 53.6% (25.2%-67.6%), N = 21). The sample size of the included trials ranged from 19 to 270 (median = 48.0; interquartile range = 40.0-85.0) and the duration of trial recruitment ranged from 3 to 50 months (median = 19.0 months; interquartile range = 10.5-34.0). Overall, a median of 3.6 days was needed to screen one patient, whereas 13.7 days were needed to randomise one participant. Over the trials duration, the median dropout rate was 7.9%. Variations in recruitment outcomes were observed across trials of different cancer types but were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The recruitment of participants to preoperative exercise randomised controlled trials is challenging, but patient retention appears to be less of a problem. Future trials investigating the effectiveness of a preoperative exercise programme following cancer surgery should consider the time taken to recruit patients. Strategies associated with improved recruitment should be investigated in future studies.

Prehabilitation in patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery - A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: The evidence on the effectiveness of prehabilitation in patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery remains lacking. Thus, the aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of prehabilitation on reducing postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This systematic review included randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of prehabilitation on postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery. A comprehensive search was conducted, with two reviewers independently screening articles and extracting data. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess risk of bias, and GRADE to rate the quality of evidence. When possible, a random effects meta-analysis was conducted. Estimates were presented as risk ratios or mean differences with their 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Of the 2764 articles identified, five trials comprising 282 patients met the eligibility criteria. Prehabilitation modalities included preoperative exercise (3), preoperative nutrition (1), and multimodal (1). The mean age of patients ranged from 66.0 to 72.1 years. All included trials presented some or high risk of bias. Pooled analyses according to the different prehabilitation modalities demonstrated low to very low quality of evidence of no effect on postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: This study revealed a small number of trials investigating the effectiveness of prehabilitation on patients undergoing bladder cancer surgery. Whether prehabilitation, including preoperative exercise, nutrition and multimodal interventions reduce postoperative morbidity and length of hospital stay following bladder cancer surgery is uncertain, as the quality of evidence is very low.

Evaluating geographical disparities on clinical outcomes following cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Rural Australians typically encounter disparities in healthcare access leading to adverse health outcomes, delayed diagnosis and reduced quality of life (QoL) parameters. These disparities may be exacerbated in advanced malignancies, where treatment is only available at highly specialised centres with appropriate multidisciplinary expertise. Thus, this study aims to determine the association between patient residence on oncological, surgical and QoL outcomes following cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intra-peritoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on consecutive patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital from January 2017 to March 2022. On the basis of their postcode of residence, patients were stratified into metropolitan and regional groups. Data encompassing demographics, oncological, surgical and QoL outcomes were compared. Statistical analysis included chi-square test, t-tests and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. RESULTS: Among the 317 patients, 228 (72%) were categorised as metropolitan and 89 (28%) as regional. Metropolitan patients presented higher rates of recurrence (61.8% versus 40.0%, p = 0.014) and shorter overall mean survival [3.8 years (95% CI: 3.44-4.09) versus 4.2 years (95% CI: 3.76-4.63), p = 0.019] compared with regional patients. No other statistically significant differences were observed in oncological, surgical and QoL outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Most oncological, surgical and QoL parameters did not differ by geographical location of patients undergoing CRS and HIPEC for peritoneal malignancies at a high-volume quaternary referral centre. Observed differences in recurrence and survival may be attributed to the selective nature of surgical referrals and variable follow-up patterns. Future research should focus on characterising referral pathways and its influence on post-operative outcomes.

Functional Outcomes Following Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Pre-operative physical status and its association with post-operative surgical outcomes is poorly understood in patients with peritoneal malignancy who undergo cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The aims of this study were to determine the pre-operative physical function in patients having CRS-HIPEC and investigate the association between physical function and post-operative outcomes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients undergoing CRS-HIPEC between 2017 and 2021 were recruited at a single quaternary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. The primary physical function measures were the 6-min walk test (6MWT) and the five-times sit to stand test (5STS). Data were collected pre-operatively and at post-operative day 10, and were analysed according to pre-operative patient characteristics and post-operative outcomes such as length of hospital stay (LOS) and complications. RESULTS: The cohort of patients that participated in functional assessments consisted of 234 patients, with a median age of 56 years. Patients having CRS-HIPEC performed worse on the 6MWT pre-operatively compared with the general Australian population (p < 0.001). Post-operatively, these patients experienced a further deterioration in 6MWT and 5STS performance and the degree of the post-operative decline in function was associated with post-operative morbidity. A higher level of pre-operative physical function was associated with shorter LOS and minor post-operative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have undergone CRS-HIPEC were functionally impaired pre-operatively compared with the general population and experience a further deterioration of physical function post-operatively. A higher level of pre-operative physical function is associated with minor post-operative morbidity, which is highly relevant for pre-operative optimisation of patients with cancer.

Research Priorities in Prehabilitation for Patients Undergoing Cancer Surgery: An International Delphi Study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, the number of prehabilitation trials has increased significantly. The identification of key research priorities is vital in guiding future research directions. Thus, the aim of this collaborative study was to define key research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. METHODS: The Delphi methodology was implemented over three rounds of surveys distributed to prehabilitation experts from across multiple specialties, tumour streams and countries via a secure online platform. In the first round, participants were asked to provide baseline demographics and to identify five top prehabilitation research priorities. In successive rounds, participants were asked to rank research priorities on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was considered if > 70% of participants indicated agreement on each research priority. RESULTS: A total of 165 prehabilitation experts participated, including medical doctors, physiotherapists, dieticians, nurses, and academics across four continents. The first round identified 446 research priorities, collated within 75 unique research questions. Over two successive rounds, a list of 10 research priorities reached international consensus of importance. These included the efficacy of prehabilitation on varied postoperative outcomes, benefit to specific patient groups, ideal programme composition, cost efficacy, enhancing compliance and adherence, effect during neoadjuvant therapies, and modes of delivery. CONCLUSIONS: This collaborative international study identified the top 10 research priorities in prehabilitation for patients undergoing cancer surgery. The identified priorities inform research strategies, provide future directions for prehabilitation research, support resource allocation and enhance the prehabilitation evidence base in cancer patients undergoing surgery.

Grading Complications in Pelvic Exenteration: Limitations of Current Classification Systems.

OBJECTIVE: To comprehensively report complications associated with pelvic exenteration and to determine the strength of associations between 3 different grading methodologies and length of stay, quality of life, and physical outcomes. BACKGROUND: It is generally accepted that pelvic exenteration is associated with high rates of surgical morbidity. However, methods of reporting in the literature are inconsistent, making it difficult to compare surgical outcomes across studies to determine the impact of surgery on patients. DESIGN: A retrospective study. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. PATIENTS: It included patients who underwent pelvic exenteration between December 2016 and August 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, Comprehensive Complication Index, and number of postoperative complications. Correlations between length of stay, physical component score, 6-minute walk test, and sit-to-stand test, and complications as graded using the Clavien-Dindo classification, Comprehensive Complication Index, and the number of complications were explored using Pearson's or point biserial correlation tests. RESULTS: In this study, 198 patients were included. The Clavien-Dindo classification was moderately positively correlated with length of stay ( r = 0.519; p < 0.0001), whereas Comprehensive Complication Index ( r = 0.744; p < 0.0001) and the number of complications ( r = 0.751; p < 0.0001) showed a strong correlation with length of stay. All these methodologies were moderately inversely correlated with a predischarge 6-minute walk test (Clavien-Dindo classification: r = -0.359, p = 0.008; Comprehensive Complication Index: r = -0.388, p = 0.007; number of complications: r = -0.467, p < 0.0001). LIMITATIONS: This single-center retrospective study involves a small sample size. Classification of grade I and II complications in this cohort of patients who tend to have complex postoperative recovery was challenging and therefore incomplete. The incomplete data may have affected the correlations. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive Complication Index and the number of postoperative complications were more strongly correlated with length of stay than the Clavien-Dindo classification in patients undergoing pelvic exenteration. Comprehensive Complication Index may be a better grading system to classify postoperative complications following pelvic exenteration. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B906 . CLASIFICACIN DE LAS COMPLICACIONES EN LA EXENTERACIN PLVICA LIMITACIONES DE LOS SISTEMAS DE CLASIFICACIN ACTUALES: OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo informar de manera integral las complicaciones asociadas con la exanteración pélvica y determinar la rlacion de las asociaciones entre tres metodologías de clasificación diferentes y la duración de la estadía, la calidad de vida y los resultados físicos.ANTECEDENTES:En general, se acepta que la exanteración pélvica se asocia con altas tasas de morbilidad quirúrgica. Sin embargo, los métodos de notificación en la literatura son inconsistentes, lo que dificulta la comparación de los resultados quirúrgicos entre estudios para determinar el impacto de la cirugía en los pacientes.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio retrospectivo.AJUSTES:Este estudio se realizó en el Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney. Australia.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes a las que se les realizó exenteración pélvica entre diciembre de 2016 y agosto de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las complicaciones se clasificaron de acuerdo con la Clasificación de Clavien-Dindo, el Índice Integral de Complicaciones y el número de complicaciones posoperatorias. Correlaciones entre la duración de la estadía, la puntuación del componente físico, la prueba de caminata de 6 minutos y la prueba de sentarse y levantarse; y las complicaciones según la clasificación de Clavien-Dindo, el CCI y el número de complicaciones se exploraron mediante las pruebas de correlación biserial de Pearson o Point.RESULTADOS:Un total de 198 pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio. La clasificación de Clavien-Dindo se correlacionó moderadamente positivamente con la duración de la estancia ( r = 0,519, p < 0,0001), mientras que el índice de complicaciones integrales ( r = 0,744, p < 0,0001) y el número de complicaciones ( r = 0,751, p < 0,0001) mostraron una fuerte correlación con la duración de la estancia. Todas estas metodologías se correlacionaron moderadamente inversamente con la prueba de caminata de 6 minutos antes del alta (Clasificación de Clavien-Dindo: r = -0,359, p = 0,008; Índice de Complicaciones Integrales: r = -0,388, p = 0,007; número de complicaciones: r = -0,467, p < 0,0001).LIMITACIONES:Un estudio retrospectivo de un solo centro incluye un tamaño de muestra pequeño. La clasificación de las complicaciones de grado I y II en esta cohorte de pacientes que tienden a tener una recuperación postoperatoria compleja fue un desafío y, por lo tanto, incompleta. Los datos incompletos pueden haber afectado las correlaciones.CONCLUSIONES:El Índice Integral de Complicaciones y el número de complicaciones postoperatorias se correlacionaron más con la duración de la estancia que la Clasificación de Clavien-Dindo en pacientes con exenteración pélvica. El Índice Integral de Complicaciones puede ser un mejor sistema de clasificación para clasificar las complicaciones posoperatorias después de la exenteración pélvica. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B906 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Implementation of a peri-operative pain-management algorithm reduces the use of opioid analgesia following pelvic exenteration surgery.

AIM: This study aimed to investigate the implementation and pain-related outcomes of a peri-operative pain-management regimen for patients undergoing pelvic exenteration surgery at a university teaching hospital. METHOD: This is a single-site prospective observational cohort study involving 100 patients who underwent pelvic exenteration surgery between January 2017 and December 2018. A pain-management algorithm regarding the use of opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia was developed between the departments of anaesthesia, pain management and intensive care. The primary outcomes were: compliance with a pain-treatment algorithm compared with a similar retrospective surgical patient cohort in 2013-2014; and requirements for regular doses of opioid analgesia at discharge, measured in oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD). RESULTS: Following the introduction of a pain-management algorithm, regional anaesthesia techniques (spinal anaesthesia, transversus abdominus plane block, preperitoneal catheters or epidural analgesia) were used in 83/98 (84.7%) of the 2017-2018 cohort compared with 13/73 (17.8%) of the 2013-2014 cohort (p < 0.001). There was a reduction in the median dose of opioid analgesics (oMEDD) at time of discharge, from 150 mg (interquartile range [IQR]: 75.0-235.0 mg) in the 2013-2014 cohort to 10 mg (IQR: 0.00-45.0 mg) in the 2017-2018 cohort (p < 0.001). There was no change in pain intensity (assessed using the Verbal Numerical Rating Score) or oMEDD in the first 7 days following surgery. CONCLUSION: Since implementation of a novel peri-operative pain-treatment algorithm, the use of opioid-sparing regional techniques and preperitoneal catheters has increased. Additionally, the dose of opioids required at the time of discharge has reduced significantly.

Pain, pain management and related outcomes following pelvic exenteration surgery: a systematic review.

AIM: Pelvic exenteration surgery can improve survival in people with advanced colorectal cancer. This systematic review aimed to review pain intensity and other outcomes, for example the management of pain, the relationship between pain and the extent of surgery and the impact of pain on short-term outcomes. METHOD: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 1 May 2021. We included interventional studies of adults with any indication for pelvic exenteration surgery that also reported pain outcomes. Risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-1. RESULTS: The search found 21 studies that reported pain following pelvic exenteration [n = 1317 patients, mean age 58.4 years (SD 4.8)]. Ten studies were judged to be at moderate risk of bias. Before pelvic exenteration, pain was reported by 19%-100% of patients. Five studies used validated measures of pain intensity. No study measured pain at all three time points in the surgical journey. The presence of pain before surgery predicted postoperative adverse pain outcomes, and pain is more likely to be experienced in those who require wider resections, including bone resection. CONCLUSION: Considering that pain following pelvic exenteration is commonly described by patients, the literature suggests that this symptom is not being measured and therefore addressed.

Depression, Anxiety, Stress and Distress Following Cytoreductive Surgery and Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy: Results of a Prospective Cohort Study.

The aim of this study was to describe the levels of depression, anxiety, stress, and distress in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). The 21-item Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) and Distress Thermometer were administered preoperatively, postoperatively day 10, and at hospital discharge to 169 patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis undergoing CRS and HIPEC. The mean preoperative values for DASS-21 subscale scores were 4.7 (depression), 4.2 (anxiety), and 8.4 (stress), and the mean preoperative Distress Thermometer rating was 4.0. No significant changes in levels of depression, stress, or distress were noted thereafter. The DASS-21 anxiety subscale score significantly increased at hospital discharge (p = .005). Higher levels of preoperative psychological depression, anxiety, stress and distress were associated with worse mental component scores. Higher preoperative depression levels were associated with the provision of more clinical psychologist occasions of service, and higher preoperative distress levels were associated with younger age. Preoperative psychological measures are important for ensuring CRS and HIPEC patients that require additional support are identified and provided with ongoing psychological interventions.

What Constitutes a Clear Margin in Patients With Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancer Undergoing Pelvic Exenteration?

OBJECTIVES: To determine what constitutes a clear resection margin (R0) in patients with LRRC. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: R0 is the most important predictor of survival in patients with LRRC. However, it is not clear what constitutes an R0. A 1-2 mm margin is often used to define R0 but this is based on primary rectal cancer studies. The same definition of R0 is likely inappropriate considering the anatomy and etiology of local recurrences. METHODS: A prospective maintained database was reviewed. A R2 margin was defined as macroscopic residual disease. R1 was defined as a microscopically involved margin (0 mm margin) and R0 as at least a 0.1 mm margin. Associations between R status and local recurrence was explored using X2 test. Associations between margins and overall survival and local recurrence free survival were explored using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: There were 210 patients eligible for inclusion for analysis. Of these, 165 (78.6%), 35 (16.7%), and 10 (4.8%) patients had R0, R1, and R2 margins, respectively. Overall survival was significantly different between patients with R0 versus R1 margins but wider resection margins do not confer a survival benefit [57 months (95% confidence interval 38.5-75.5) vs 33 months (95% confidence interval 20.3-45.7), P = 0.03]. Local recurrence free survival was significantly different between patients with R0 versus R1 margins (2- and 5-year local recurrence free survivals of 53.5% and 20.4% vs 25.9% and 14.8%, respectively, P = 0.001 for both). Margins >0.5 mm were not predictive of local recurrence free survival. CONCLUSIONS: A microscopically clear resection margin is most important in predicting overall survival. Margins up to 0.5 mm offers a local recurrence benefit but does not confer survival benefit.

PRehabIlitatiOn with pReoperatIve exercise and educaTion for patients undergoing major abdominal cancer surgerY: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled TRIAL (PRIORITY TRIAL).

BACKGROUND: Radical surgery is the mainstream treatment for patients presenting with advanced primary or recurrent gastrointestinal cancers; however, the rate of postoperative complications is exceptionally high. The current evidence suggests that improving patients' fitness during the preoperative period may enhance postoperative recovery. Thus, the primary aim of this study is to establish the effectiveness of prehabilitation with a progressive, individualised, preoperative exercise and education program compared to usual care alone in reducing the proportion of patients with postoperative in-hospital complications. The secondary aims are to investigate the effectiveness of the preoperative intervention on reducing the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, improving quality of life and morbidity, and reducing costs. METHODS: This is a multi-centre, assessor-blinded, pragmatic, comparative, randomised controlled trial. A total of 172 patients undergoing pelvic exenteration, cytoreductive surgery, oesophagectomy, hepatectomy, gastrectomy or pancreatectomy will be recruited. Participants will be randomly allocated to prehabilitation with a preoperative exercise and education program (intervention group), delivered over 4 to 8 weeks before surgery by community physiotherapists/exercise physiologists, or usual care alone (control group). The intervention will comprise 12 to 24 individualised, progressive exercise sessions (including aerobic/anaerobic, resistance, and respiratory exercises), recommendations of home exercises (16 to 32 sessions), and daily incidental physical activity advice. Outcome measures will be collected at baseline, the week prior to surgery, during the hospital stay, and on the day of discharge from hospital, and 1 month and 1 months postoperatively. The primary outcome will be the development of in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes include the length of intensive care unit and hospital stay, quality of life, postoperative morbidity and costs. DISCUSSION: The successful completion of this trial will provide robust and high-quality evidence on the efficacy of a preoperative community- and home-based exercise and education intervention on important postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing major gastrointestinal cancer surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered prospectively with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ( ACTRN12621000617864 ) on 24th May 2021.

Differences in Surgical Outcomes and Quality-of-Life Outcomes in Pelvic Exenteration Between Locally Advanced Versus Locally Recurrent Rectal Cancers.

BACKGROUND: Although pelvic exenteration remains the only curative option for locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer, only limited evidence is available on the differences in surgical and quality-of-life outcomes between the two. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare surgical outcomes and identify any differences or predictors of quality of life of patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer undergoing pelvic exenteration. DESIGN: This was a cohort study. SETTING: This study was conducted at Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia. PATIENTS: This study included patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and locally recurrent rectal cancer who underwent pelvic exenteration between July 2008 and March 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measures included Short Form 36 version 2 and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score. RESULTS: A total of 271 patients were included in this study. Locally advanced rectal cancer patients had higher rates of R0 resection ( p = 0.003), neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy ( p < 0.001), and had greater median overall survival (75.1 vs. 45.8 months), although the latter was clinically but not statistically significant. There was a higher blood loss ( p < 0.001), longer length of stay ( p = 0.039), and longer operative time ( p = 0.002) in the locally recurrent rectal cancer group. This group also had a higher mean baseline physical component summary score and Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal score; however, there were no significant differences in complications or quality-of-life outcomes between with the two groups at any time points postoperatively up to 12 months. LIMITATION: The study was from a specialized experienced center, which could limit its generalizability. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with locally recurrent rectal cancer tend to require a more extensive surgery with a longer operative time and more blood loss and longer recovery from surgery, but despite this, their quality of life is comparable to those with locally advanced rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 . DIFERENCIAS EN LOS RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS Y LOS RESULTADOS DE LA CALIDAD DE VIDA EN LA EXENTERACIN PLVICA ENTRE EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE AVANZADO Y EL CNCER DE RECTO LOCALMENTE RECIDIVANTE: ANTECEDENTES:Aunque la exenteración pélvica sigue siendo la única opción curativa para el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y el cáncer de recto localmente recurrente, solo hay evidencia limitada disponible sobre las diferencias en los resultados quirúrgicos y de calidad de vida entre los dos.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tuvo como objetivo comparar los resultados quirúrgicos e identificar cualquier diferencia o predictor de la calidad de vida de los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente sometidos a exenteración pélvica.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó en el Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, Australia.PACIENTES:Este estudio incluyó pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y cáncer de recto localmente recurrente que se sometieron a exenteración pélvica entre julio de 2008 y marzo de 2019.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las principales medidas de resultado incluyeron el formulario corto 36 versión 2 y la puntuación de la evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal.RESULTADOS:Un total de 271 pacientes fueron incluidos en este estudio. Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado tuvieron tasas más altas de resección R0 ( p = 0,003), quimiorradioterapia neoadyuvante ( p < 0,001) y una mediana de supervivencia general más alta (75,1 frente a 45,8 meses),a pesar de que esta última fue clínica pero no estadísticamente significativa. Hubo una mayor pérdida de sangre ( p < 0,001), una estancia más prolongada ( p = 0,039) y un tiempo operatorio más prolongado ( p = 0,002) en el grupo de cáncer de recto localmente recurrente. También tenían una puntuación de componente físico inicial media más alta y una puntuación de Evaluación funcional de la terapia del cáncer colorrectal; sin embargo, no hubo diferencias significativas en las complicaciones o los resultados de la calidad de vida entre los dos grupos en ningún momento después de la operación hasta los 12 meses.LIMITACIÓN:El estudio fue de un centro especializado con experiencia, lo que podría limitar su generalización.CONCLUSIONES:Los pacientes con cáncer de recto localmente recurrente tienden a requerir una cirugía más extensa con un tiempo operatorio más largo y más pérdida de sangre y una recuperación más prolongada de la cirugía, pero a pesar de esto, su calidad de vida es comparable a aquellos con cáncer de recto localmente avanzado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B1000 . (Traducción-Dr. Yolanda Colorado ).

Elderly Patients Have Better Quality of Life but Worse Survival Following Pelvic Exenteration: A 25-Year Single-Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To describe quality of life (QOL) and survival outcomes following pelvic exenteration (PE) in old and young patients. BACKGROUND: PE is a management option for complete resection in locally advanced pelvic cancers. Few studies have examined the impact of age on the outcome in elderly patients following PE. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective cohort of consecutive patients undergoing partial and complete PE between 1994 and 2019. Patients were divided into a younger (< 65 years) or older cohort (≥ 65 years) based on their age. QoL was assessed using the SF-36 and FACT-C questionnaires and survival estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: For 710 patients who underwent PE during the study period, FACT-C total score was significantly better in the elderly during the whole follow-up period of 5 years. Mental component score (SF-36) was significantly better at baseline (p = 0.008) and at 24 months postoperatively (p = 0.042), in the elderly group. Median overall survival was 75 months in the younger cohort and 53 months in the older cohort (p = 0.004). In subgroup analysis, older patients with recurrent or primary rectal cancer had a median survival of 37 and 70 months, respectively. Postoperative cardiovascular complications were greater in the elderly cohort (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Elderly patients had better overall QoL but lower survival that is probably related to cardiovascular complications rather than to cancer as both groups had similar R0 resection rate. Hence, the elderly population should be considered equally for PE.