The impact of hospital volume on racial disparities in resected rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although high volume centers (HVC) equate to improved outcomes in rectal cancer, the impact of surgical volume related to race is less defined. METHODS: Patients who underwent surgical resection for stage I-III rectal adenocarcinoma were divided into cohorts based on race and hospital surgical volume. Outcomes were analyzed following 1:1 propensity-score matching using logistic, Poisson, and Cox regression analyses with marginal effects. RESULTS: Fifty-four thousand one hundred and eighty-four (91.5%) non-Black and 5043 (8.5%) Black patients underwent resection of rectal cancer. Following 1:1 matching of non-Black (N = 5026) and Black patients, 5-year overall survival (OS) of Black patients was worse (72% vs. 74.4%, average marginal effects [AME] 0.66, p = 0.04) than non-Black patients. When compared to non-Black patients managed at HVCs, Black patients had worse OS (70.1% vs. 74.7%, AME 1.55, p = 0.03), but this difference was not significant when comparing OS between non-Black and Black patients managed at HVCs (72.3% vs. 74.7%, AME 0.62, p = 0.06). Length of stay was longer among Black and HVC patients across all cohorts. There was no difference across cohorts in 90-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Although racial disparities exist in rectal cancer, this disparity appears to be ameliorated when patients are managed at HVCs.

Influence of non-clinical factors on restorative rectal cancer surgery: An analysis of four specialized population-based digestive cancer registries in France.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to measure the association between deprivation, health care accessibility and health care system with the likelihood of receiving non-restorative rectal cancer surgery (NRRCS). METHODS: All adult patients who had rectal resection for invasive adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2007 and 2016 in four French specialised cancer registries were included. A multilevel logistic regression with random effect was used to assess the link between patient and health care structure characteristics on the probability of NRRCS. RESULTS: 2997 patients underwent rectal cancer resection in 68 health care structures: 708 (23.63%) had NRRCS. The likelihood of receiving NRCCS was associated with patients' characteristics (97%): age, sub peritoneal rectal tumors, neoadjuvant therapy, residual tumour and stage III . There was no impact of European Deprivation Index or remoteness on NRRCS. Inter-health care structure variability was modest (3%), of which 50% was explained by the high group volume of colorectal procedures and the type of health care structure which were associated with less NRRCS (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: There is an influence of operating volume and type of structure on the probability of NRRCS, but it has truly little importance in explaining differences in performances. The probability of NRRCS is mainly affected by clinical determinant.

Short-Term Outcomes for Laparoscopic Surgery for BMI≥30 Patients with Rectal Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Obesity is known to be a preoperative risk factor for rectal cancer surgery. This study aimed to investigate the influence of obesity on the surgical outcomes of laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer. METHODS: The clinical data of 356 patients with rectal cancer from Jan 2012 to Dec 2015 were analyzed retrospectively. Perioperative outcomes were compared between 48 patients with a BMI (body mass index) ≥30 kg/m2 [obese group ] and 308 patients with a BMI≥30 kg/m2 [non-obese group] who underwent laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: Operation times were significantly longer for the obese group than for the non-obese group (125.2±30.5 min vs. 180.5±58.2 min, P=0.021). There were no statistically significant differences between two groups in terms of intraoperative blood loss, the number of retrieved lymph nodes, postoperative recovery and postoperative complications (P≥0.05). During the follow-up period, the overall survival rates were not significantly different between the two groups [66.7% (32/48) vs 67.2% (207/308), P=0.787]. The differences in recurrence and metastasis between the two groups were not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Our analysis revealed that laparoscopic surgery can be safely performed in patients with BMI≥30. The procedure was considered to be difficult but sufficiently feasible.

Clinical outcome of neoadjuvant chemoradiation in rectal cancer treatment.

ABSTRACT: To determine the clinical and pathological outcome of locally advanced rectal cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation (chemoradiotherapy [CRT]) followed by curative surgery and to identify predictive factors of pathological complete response (pCR).Locally advanced rectal cancer patients undergoing CRT followed by curative surgery from January 2012 to December 2017 were included. Patient's demographic data, pretreatment tumor characteristics, type of CRT regimens, type of surgery, postoperative complications, pathological reports and follow up records were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were applied to identify predictive factors for pCR. Five-year disease free and overall survival were estimated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared between pCR and non-pCR groups.A total of 85 patients were analyzed. Eighteen patients (21.1%) achieved pCR. The sphincter-saving surgery rate was 57.6%. After univariate analyses, tumor length >4 cm (P = .007) and positive lymph nodes (P = .040) were significantly associated with decreased rate of pCR. Complete clinical response was significantly associated with higher rate of pCR (P = .015). Multivariate analyses demonstrated that tumor length >4 cm (P = .010) was significantly associated with decreased rate of pCR. After a median follow-up of 65 months (IQR 34-79), the calculated 5-year overall survival and disease-free survival rates were 81.4% and 69.7%, respectively. Patients who achieved pCR tend to had longer 5-year disease-free survival (P = .355) and overall survival (P = .361) than those who did not.Tumor length >4 cm was associated with decreased rate of pCR in locally advanced rectal cancer who had CRT followed by surgery. Longer waiting time or more intense adjuvant treatment may be considered to improved pCR and oncological outcomes.

Organ Preservation in Patients with Rectal Cancer Treated with Total Neoadjuvant Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective studies suggest that watch-and-wait is a safe alternative to total mesorectal excision in selected patients with a clinical complete response after chemoradiotherapy. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the proportion of patients with rectal cancer who may benefit from watch-and-wait. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective analysis of data from prospectively maintained databases. SETTING: This study was conducted at a comprehensive cancer center. PATIENTS: Consecutive patients with stage II or III rectal adenocarcinoma who were treated with total neoadjuvant therapy using induction chemotherapy between 2012 and 2019 under the care of the same surgeon were included. INTERVENTION: Induction-type total neoadjuvant therapy consisted of 8 cycles of leucovorin-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin or 5 cycles of capecitabine-oxaliplatin before chemoradiotherapy. Patients with a clinical complete response were offered watch-and-wait, and patients with residual tumor were offered total mesorectal excision. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Tumor response was assessed with a digital rectal examination, endoscopy, and MRI. Patient characteristics and recurrence-free survival were compared between the watch-and-wait group and the total mesorectal excision group. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients were included in the analysis. One (1%) died during neoadjuvant therapy. Fifty-five patients (62.5%) had an incomplete clinical response and underwent surgery, 10 (18%) of the 55 developed distant metastasis, and 3 (5%) developed local recurrence. The remaining 32 patients (36.3%) had a clinical complete response and underwent watch-and-wait. On average, patients in the watch-and-wait group were older and had smaller, more distal tumors compared with patients in the surgery group. The median radiation dose, number of chemotherapy cycles, rate of adverse events, and length of follow-up did not differ substantively between the total mesorectal excision group and the watch-and-wait group. In the watch-and-wait group, 2 (6%) patients developed tumor regrowth, and one of them had distant metastasis. Recurrence-free survival was significantly higher in the watch-and-wait group. LIMITATIONS: Generalizability, sample size, and follow-up duration were limitations of this study. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of patients with stage II or III rectal cancer can benefit from a watch-and-wait approach with the aim of preserving the rectum if treated with induction-type total neoadjuvant therapy and followed by an experienced multidisciplinary team. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B688. CONSERVACIN DE RGANOS EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO TRATADOS CON TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE TOTAL: ANTECEDENTES:Estudios retrospectivos sugieren que observar y esperar es una alternativa segura a la escisión mesorrectal total en pacientes seleccionados con una respuesta clínica completa después de la quimiorradioterapia.OBJETIVO:Determinar la proporción de pacientes con cáncer de recto que pueden beneficiarse de observar y esperar.DISEÑO:Análisis retrospectivo de datos de bases de datos mantenidas de forma prospectiva.ESCENARIO:Centro Oncológico Integral.PACIENTES:Pacientes consecutivos con adenocarcinoma de recto en estadio II o III tratados con TNT utilizando quimioterapia de inducción entre 2012 y 2019 bajo el cuidado del mismo cirujano.INTERVENCIÓN:La terapia neoadyuvante total de tipo inducción consistió en ocho ciclos de leucovorín-fluorouracilo-oxaliplatino o cinco ciclos de capecitabina-oxaliplatino antes de la quimiorradioterapia. A los pacientes con una respuesta clínica completa se les ofreció observar y esperar, y a los pacientes con tumor residual se les ofreció la escisión mesorrectal total.PRINCIPALES RESULTADOS Y MEDIDAS:La respuesta del tumor se evaluó con un tacto rectal, endoscopia y resonancia magnética. Se compararon las características de los pacientes y la supervivencia libre de recurrencia entre el grupo de observación y espera y el grupo de escisión mesorrectal total.RESULTADOS:Se incluyó en el análisis a un total de 88 pacientes. Uno (1%) murió durante la terapia neoadyuvante. Cincuenta y cinco pacientes (62.5%) tuvieron una respuesta clínica incompleta y se sometieron a cirugía; 10 (18%) de los 55 desarrollaron metástasis a distancia y 3 (5%) desarrollaron recidiva local. Los 32 pacientes restantes (36.3%) tuvieron una cCR (respuesta clínica completa) y se sometieron a observar y esperar. En promedio, los pacientes del grupo de observación y espera eran mayores y tenían tumores más pequeños y distales en comparación con el grupo de cirugía. La dosis mediana de radiación, el número de ciclos de quimioterapia, la tasa de eventos adversos y la duración del seguimiento no difirieron sustancialmente entre el grupo de escisión mesorrectal total y el grupo de observación y espera. En el grupo de observación y espera, 2 (6%) pacientes desarrollaron recrecimiento del tumor y uno de ellos tuvo metástasis a distancia. La supervivencia libre de recurrencia fue significativamente mayor en el grupo de observación y espera.LIMITACIONES:Generalizabilidad, tamaño de la muestra, duración del seguimiento.CONCLUSIONES:Aproximadamente un tercio de los pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio II o III pueden beneficiarse de un abordaje de observación y espera con el objetivo de preservar el recto si se tratan con terapia neoadyuvante total de tipo inducción y son seguidos por un equipo multidisciplinario experimentado. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B688.

Validation study of the ACS NSQIP surgical risk calculator for two procedures in Japan.

INTRODUCTION: The ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator (SRC) assesses risk to support goal-concordant care. While it accurately predicts US outcomes, its performance internationally is unknown. This study evaluates SRC accuracy in predicting mortality following low anterior resection (LAR) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in NSQIP patients and accuracy retention when applied to native Japanese patients (National Clinical Database, NCD). METHODS: NSQIP (41,260 LAR; 15,114 PD) and NCD cases (61,220 LAR; 27,901 PD) from 2015 to 2017 were processed through the SRC mortality model. Country-specific calibration and discrimination were assessed with and without an intercept correction applied to the Japanese data. RESULTS: The SRC exhibited acceptable calibration for LAR and PD when applied to NSQIP data but miscalibration for NCD data. A simple correction to the model intercept, motivated by lower mortality rates in the Japanese data, successfully remediated the miscalibration. CONCLUSIONS: The SRC may inaccurately predict surgical risk when applied to the native Japanese population. An intercept correction method is suggested when miscalibration is encountered; it is simple to implement and may permit effective international use of the SRC.

Comparing outcomes for non-metastatic rectal cancer in academic vs. community centers: A propensity-matched analysis of the National Cancer Database.

BACKGROUND: Little is known regarding the impact of hospital academic status on outcomes following rectal cancer surgery. We compare these outcomes for nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma at academic versus community institutions. METHODS: The National Cancer Database (2010-2016) was queried for patients with nonmetastatic rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent resection. Propensity score matching was performed across facility cohorts to balance confounding covariates. Kaplan-Meier estimation and Cox-proportional hazards regression were used to analyze survival, other short and long-term outcomes were analyzed by way of logistic regression. RESULTS: After matching, 15,096 patients were included per cohort. Academic centers were associated with significantly decreased odds of conversion and positive margins with significantly increased odds of ≥12 regional nodes examined. Academic programs also had decreased odds of 30 and 90-day mortality and decreased 5-year mortality hazard. After matching for facility volume, no significant differences in outcomes between centers was seen. CONCLUSIONS: No difference between academic and community centers in outcomes following surgery for non-metastatic rectal cancer was seen after matching for facility procedural volume.

Omission of or Poor Response to Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Impacts Radial Margin Positivity Rates in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: In the setting of multidisciplinary standardized care of locally advanced rectal cancer, preoperative chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision have become the mainstay treatment. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate whether the lack of preoperative chemoradiotherapy or poor response to it is associated with higher radial margin disease involvement in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study using a publicly available database. SETTING: Data were collected from the proctectomy-targeted National Surgical Quality Improvement Project file from 2016 to 2017. PATIENTS: A total of 1161 patients were analyzed. They were categorized into 3 groups: patients who did not receive any preoperative chemoradiotherapy (28.6%), patients who received and responded to preoperative chemoradiotherapy (41.2%), and patients who received but did not respond to preoperative chemoradiotherapy (30.2%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Response to treatment was determined by using the American Joint Committee on Cancer pretreatment and final pathological staging. Circumferential radial margin was extracted from the targeted proctectomy file. RESULTS: Disease-involved positive circumferential radial margin was found in 86 (7.4%) cases. Positive radial margin was noted in 11 of 479 patients (2.3%) who underwent preoperative chemoradiotherapy and responded to treatment, 30 of 350 patients (8.6%) who did not respond or had a poor response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy, and 45 of 332 patients (13.6%) who did not receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy (p < 0.001). Regression analysis demonstrated that patients who do not receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy or have poor response to it have 6.6 and 4 times higher chances of having a positive radial margin. LIMITATIONS: There is a risk of selection bias, unidentified confounders, and missing data despite the use of a nationwide cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Omission of indicated preoperative chemoradiotherapy or poor response to it is associated with increased risk of radial margin positivity. More efforts are needed for standardized rectal cancer care with the appropriate use of preoperative chemoradiotherapy. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B467. LA OMISIN O LA ESCASA RESPUESTA A QUIMIORADIOTERAPIA PREOPERATORIA, AFECTA LAS TASAS DE POSITIVIDAD DEL MARGEN RADIAL, EN EL CNCER RECTAL LOCALMENTE AVANZADO: ANTECEDENTES:En el contexto de la atención multidisciplinaria estandarizada del cáncer rectal localmente avanzado, la quimioradioterapia preoperatoria y la escisión mesorrectal total, se han convertido en el tratamiento principal.OBJETIVO:Evaluar si la omisión de quimioradioterapia preoperatoria o la escasa respuesta, se asocia con mayor enfermedad del margen radial, en pacientes con cáncer rectal localmente avanzado.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo utilizando una base de datos disponible públicamente.AJUSTE:Se recopilaron datos del archivo del Proyecto Nacional de Mejora de la Calidad Quirúrgica dirigido a la proctectomía de 2016-2017.PACIENTES:Se analizaron un total de 1161 pacientes. Clasificados en tres grupos: pacientes que no recibieron quimioradioterapia preoperatoria (28,6%), pacientes que recibieron y respondieron a quimioradioterapia preoperatoria (41,2%) y pacientes que recibieron pero no respondieron a la quimioradioterapia preoperatoria (30,2%).PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La respuesta al tratamiento se determinó utilizando el pre tratamiento y la estatificación patológica final, del American Joint Committee on Cancer. El margen radial circunferencial se extrajo del archivo de proctectomía dirigida.RESULTADOS:Se encontró enfermedad que abarcaba el margen radial circunferencial +, en el 86 (7,4%) casos. Se observó el margen radial +, en 11 de 479 pacientes (2,3%) que se sometieron a quimioradioterapia preoperatoria y respondieron al tratamiento, 30 de 350 pacientes (8,6%) que no respondieron o tuvieron una mala respuesta con quimioradioterapia preoperatoria y en 45 de 332 pacientes (13,6%) que no recibieron quimioradioterapia preoperatoria (p <0,001). El análisis de regresión demostró que los pacientes que no reciben quimioradioterapia preoperatoria o que tienen escasa respuesta, presentan respectivamente, 6,6 y 4 veces más probabilidades de tener un margen radial +.LIMITACIONES:Existe el riesgo de sesgo de selección, factores de confusión no identificados y datos faltantes a pesar del uso de una cohorte nacional.CONCLUSIONES:La omisión de la quimioradioterapia preoperatoria indicada o la escasa respuesta, se asocian a un mayor riesgo de positividad del margen radial. Se necesitan mayores esfuerzos en la atención estandarizada del cáncer rectal, con el uso adecuado de quimioradioterapia preoperatoria. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B467.

Influence of the introduction of caseload requirements on indication for visceral cancer surgery in Switzerland.

BACKGROUND: In 2013 Swiss health authorities implemented annual hospital caseload requirements (CR) for five areas of visceral surgery. We assess the impact of the implementation of CR on indication for surgery in esophageal, pancreatic and rectal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective analysis of national registry data of all inpatient admissions between January 1st, 2005 and December 31st, 2015. Primary end-point was the age-adjusted resection rate for esophageal, pancreatic and rectal cancer among patients with at least one cancer-specific hospitalization per year. We calculated age-adjusted rate ratios for period effects before and after implementation of CR and odds ratios (OR) based on a generalized estimation equation. A relative increase of 5% in age-adjusted relative risk was set a priori as relevant from a health policy perspective. RESULTS: Age-adjusted resection rates before and after the implementation of CR were 0.12 and 0.13 (Relative Risk [RR] 1.08; 95%-Confidence Interval [CI] 0.85-1.36) in esophageal cancer, 0.22 and 0.26 (RR 1.17; 95%-CI 0.85-1.58) in pancreatic cancer and 0.38 and 0.43 (RR 1.14; 95%-CI 0.99-1.30) in rectal cancer. In adjusted models OR for resection after the implementation of CR were 1.40 (95%-CI 1.24-1.58) in esophageal cancer, 1.05 (95%-CI 0.96-1.15) in pancreatic cancer and 0.92 (95%-CI 0.87-0.97) in rectal cancer. CONCLUSION: Implementation of CR was associated with an increase of resection rates above the a priori set margins in all resections groups. In adjusted models, odds for resection were significantly higher for esophageal cancer, while they remained unchanged for pancreatic and decreased for rectal cancer.

Functional Outcomes and Quality of Life after Redo Anastomosis in Patients With Rectal Cancer: An International Multicenter Comparative Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Redo anastomosis can be considered in selected patients with persistent leakage, stenosis, or local recurrence. It is technically challenging, and little is known about the functional outcomes after this seldomly performed type of surgery. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare functional outcomes and the quality of life between redo anastomosis and primary successful anastomosis following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. DESIGN: This study was designed as an international multicenter comparative cohort study. SETTINGS: The study was conducted in 3 tertiary referral centers in the Netherlands, Belgium, and France. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing redo anastomosis were compared with patients with a primary successful anastomosis after total mesorectal excision for rectal cancer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Low anterior resection syndrome score, European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30, and EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaires were used to assess outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 170 patients were included; 52 underwent redo anastomosis and 118 were controls. Major low anterior resection syndrome occurred in 73% after redo anastomosis compared with 68% following primary successful anastomosis (p = 0.52). The redo group had worse EORTC QLQ-CR29 mean scores for fecal incontinence (p = 0.03) and flatulence (p = 0.008). There were no differences in urinary (p = 0.48) or sexual dysfunction, either in men (p = 0.83) or in women (p = 0.76). Significantly worse scores in the redo group were found for global health (p = 0.002), role (p = 0.049) and social function (p = 0.006), body image (p = 0.03), and anxiety (p = 0.02). LIMITATIONS: This study is limited by the possible response bias. CONCLUSIONS: Redo anastomosis is associated with significantly worse quality of life compared with primary successful anastomosis. However, major low anterior resection syndrome was comparable between groups and should not be a reason to preclude restoration of bowel continuity in highly motivated patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B565. RESULTADOS FUNCIONALES Y DE CALIDAD DE VIDA POSTERIOR A LA RECONSTRUCCIN DE LA ANASTOMOSIS EN PACIENTES CON CNCER DE RECTO ESTUDIO INTERNACIONAL MULTICNTRICO DE COHORTE COMPARATIVO: ANTECEDENTES:Se puede considerar reconstruir la anastomosis en pacientes seleccionados con fuga persistente, estenosis o recidiva local. Esto es técnicamente desafiante y poco se sabe sobre los resultados funcionales después de este tipo de cirugía que rara vez se realiza.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar resultados funcionales y la calidad de vida entre reconstrucción de la anastomosis y la anastomosis primaria exitosa posterior de la escisión total de mesorrecto (TME) por cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Este estudio fue diseñado como un estudio internacional multicéntrico de cohorte comparativo.ENTORNO CLINICO:El estudio se llevó a cabo en tres centros de referencia terciarios en Holanda, Bélgica y Francia.PACIENTES:Los pacientes sometidos a reconstrucción de anastomosis fueron comparados con pacientes con anastomosis primaria exitosa después de TME por cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Los cuestionarios; Escala de Síndrome de Resección Anterior Baja (LARS), EORTC QLQ-C30, y QLQ-CR29, fueron utilizados para evaluar los resultados.RESULTADOS:En total, se incluyeron 170 pacientes; 52 reconstrucción de anastomosis y 118 controles. LARS ocurrió en el 73% posterior a la reconstrucción de la anastomosis en comparación con el 68% posterior a la anastomosis primaria exitosa (p = 0,52). El grupo de reconstrucción tuvo peores puntuaciones medias de EORTC QLQ-CR29 para incontinencia fecal (p = 0,03) y flatulencia (p = 0,008). No hubo diferencias en disfunción urinaria (p = 0,48) o sexual, ni en hombres (p = 0,83) ni en mujeres (p = 0,76). Se encontraron puntuaciones significativamente peores en el grupo de reconstrucción para salud global (p = 0,002), desempeño (p = 0,049) y función social (p = 0,006), imagen corporal (p = 0,03) y ansiedad (p = 0,02).LIMITACIONES:La limitación de este estudio es el posible sesgo de respuesta.CONCLUSIONES:La reconstrucción de la anastomosis se asocia con una calidad de vida significativamente peor en comparación con los pacientes con anastomosis primaria exitosa. Sin embargo, LARS fue comparable entre los grupos y no debería ser una razón para impedir la restauración de la continuidad intestinal en pacientes muy motivados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B565.

Persistent High Rate of Positive Margins and Postoperative Complications After Surgery for cT4 Rectal Cancer at a National Level.

BACKGROUND: A more extensive resection is often required in locally advanced rectal cancer, depending on preoperative neoadjuvant treatment response. OBJECTIVE: Circumferential margin involvement and postoperative outcomes after total mesorectal excision and multivisceral resection were assessed in patients with clinical locally advanced (cT4) rectal cancer at a national level. DESIGN: This is a population-based study. SETTINGS: Data were retrieved from the Dutch Colorectal Audit. PATIENTS: A total of 2242 of 2881 patients with cT4 rectal cancer between January 2009 and December 2017 were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcomes were resection margins, postoperative complications, and mortality. RESULTS: Multivisceral resection was performed in 936 of 2242 patients, of whom 629 underwent extended multivisceral resection. Positive circumferential margin rate was higher after multivisceral resection than after total mesorectal excision: 21.2% vs 13.9% (p < 0.001). More postoperative complications occurred after limited and extended multivisceral resections than after total mesorectal excision (44.1% and 53.8% vs 37.6%, p < 0.001). Incidence of 30-day mortality was similarly low in both groups (1.5% vs 2.2%, p = 0.20). Independent predictors of postoperative complications were age ≥70 years (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.04-1.56]; p = 0.02), male sex (OR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.38-2.04]; p< 0.001), mucinous tumors (OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.06-2.27]; p = 0.02), extended multivisceral resection (OR, 1.98 [95% CI, 1.56-2.52]; p< 0.001), Hartmann procedure (OR, 1.42 [95% CI, 1.07-1.90]; p = 0.02), and abdominoperineal resection (OR, 1.56 [95% CI, 1.25-1.96]; p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Data specifying the extent of multivisceral resections and Clavien Dindo I to II complications were not available. CONCLUSIONS: This population-based study revealed relatively high circumferential margin positivity and postoperative complication rates in patients with cT4 rectal cancer, especially after multivisceral resections, but low mortality rates. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B457. ALTA TASA PERSISTENTE DE MRGENES POSITIVOS Y COMPLICACIONES POSTOPERATORIAS DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER RECTAL CTA NIVEL NACIONAL: ANTECEDENTES:A menudo se requiere una resección más extensa en el cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, según la respuesta al tratamiento neoadyuvante preoperatorio.OBJETIVO:Se evaluó la afectación del margen circunferencial y los resultados postoperatorios después de la escisión mesorrectal total y la resección multivisceral en pacientes con cáncer rectal clínico localmente avanzado (cT4) a nivel nacional.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio poblacional.ENTORNO CLINICO:Los datos se recuperaron de la Auditoría colorrectal holandesa.PACIENTES:Se seleccionaron un total de 2242 de 2881 pacientes con cáncer de recto cT4 entre enero de 2009 y diciembre de 2017.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACION:Los principales resultados fueron los márgenes de resección, las complicaciones postoperatorias y la mortalidad.RESULTADOS:Se realizó resección multivisceral en 936 de 2242 pacientes, de los cuales 629 fueron sometidos a resección multivisceral extendida. La tasa de margen circunferencial positivo fue mayor después de la resección multivisceral que después de la escisión mesorrectal total: 21,2% versus a 13,9% (p <0,001). Se produjeron más complicaciones postoperatorias después de resecciones multiviscerales limitadas y extendidas en comparación con la escisión mesorrectal total (44,1% y 53,8% versus a 37,6%, p <0,001). La incidencia de mortalidad a 30 días fue igualmente baja en ambos grupos (1,5% versus a 2,2%, p = 0,20). Los predictores independientes de complicaciones posoperatorias fueron la edad ≥70 años (OR = 1,28, IC del 95% [1,04 a 1,56], p = 0,02), hombres (OR = 1,68, IC del 95% [1,38 a 2,04], p <0,001), tumores mucinosos (OR = 1,55, IC del 95% [1,06 a 2,27], p = 0,02), resección multivisceral extendida (OR = 1,98, IC del 95% [1,56 a 2,52], p <0,001), Hartmann (OR = 1,42, 95% Cl [1,07 a 1,90], p = 0,02) y resección abdominoperineal (OR 1,56, Cl 95% [1,25 a 1,96], p <0,001).LIMITACIONES:No se disponía de datos que especificaran el alcance de las resecciones multiviscerales y las complicaciones de Clavien Dindo I-II.CONCLUSIONES:Este estudio poblacional reveló tasas de complicaciones postoperatorias y positividad del margen circunferencial relativamente altas en pacientes con cáncer de recto cT4, especialmente después de resecciones multiviscerales, pero tasas de mortalidad bajas. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B457.

Transanal Total Mesorectal Excision in Mid-Low Rectal Cancer: Evaluation of the Learning Curve and Comparison of Short-term Results With Standard Laparoscopic Total Mesorectal Excision.

BACKGROUND: Ever since transanal total mesorectal excision was introduced by Sylla and Lacy in 2010, it has become more popular among colorectal surgeons. However, some surgeons hesitate to use it, because this novel approach differs greatly from laparoscopic total mesorectal excision and requires a long learning curve. OBJECTIVE: This study analyzed the learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision procedure and compared the different phases of transanal total mesorectal excision with laparoscopic total mesorectal excision. DESIGN: This is retrospective case-control study. SETTINGS: We used data from the approved colorectal cancer database of the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University. PATIENTS: The patients involved in this study underwent transanal total mesorectal excision performed by a single surgeon (L.K.) or underwent laparoscopic transanal total mesorectal excision performed by experienced surgeons. INTERVENTIONS: Transanal or laparoscopic resection of mid-low rectal cancer was conducted. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Perioperative complication and resection margin were measured. RESULTS: A total of 342 patients were included in both groups. The learning curve of transanal total mesorectal excision was divided into 3 phases. Data show that demographics and tumor characteristics were not significantly different between the matched groups. Indeed, during phase 1, only operative time was longer than in the laparoscopic group, whereas, during phase 2, results from the transanal group were comparable with the laparoscopic group. Results show that, during phase 3, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative hospital stay were all lower than in the laparoscopic group. Local recurrence occurred in 3 patients during phase 1 and in 1 patient during phase 2. LIMITATIONS: This study was a small retrospective study and focused on just 1 surgeon performing transanal total mesorectal excision. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term and histopathologic outcomes are similar compared between a transanal group and matched laparoscopic group. Transanal total mesorectal excision also provided good oncologic outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B450. ESCISIN MESORRECTAL TOTAL TRANSANAL EN EL CNCER DE RECTO MEDIOBAJO EVALUACIN DE LA CURVA DE APRENDIZAJE Y COMPARACIN DE RESULTADOS A CORTO PLAZO CON TME LAPAROSCPICA ESTNDAR: ANTECEDENTES:Desde que Sylla y Lacy introdujeron la escisión mesorrectal total transanal en 2010, se ha vuelto más popular entre los cirujanos colorrectales. Sin embargo, algunos cirujanos dudan en utilizarlo, porque este nuevo método difiere mucho de la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica y requiere una larga curva de aprendizaje.OBJETIVO:Este estudio analizó la curva de aprendizaje del procedimiento de escisión mesorrectal total transanal y comparó las diferentes fases de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal con la escisión mesorrectal total laparoscópica.DISEÑO:Este es un estudio retrospectivo de casos y controles.ENTORNO CLINICO:Utilizamos base de datos de cáncer colorrectal aprobada del Sexto Hospital Afiliado de la Universidad Sun Yat-sen (Guangzhou, China).PACIENTES:Los pacientes involucrados en este estudio fueron sometidos a escisión mesorrectal total transanal realizada por un solo cirujano (LK) o se sometieron a escisión mesorrectal total transanal laparoscópica realizada por cirujanos experimentados.INTERVENCIONES:Resección transanal o laparoscópica de cáncer de recto medio-bajo.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VOLARCION:complicación perioperatoria y margen de resección.RESULTADOS:Se incluyó un total de 342 pacientes en ambos grupos. La curva de aprendizaje de la escisión mesorrectal total transanal se dividió en tres fases. Los datos muestran que las características demográficas y tumorales no fueron significativamente diferentes entre los grupos emparejados. De hecho, durante la fase 1, solo el tiempo operatorio fue más largo que en el grupo laparoscópico. Mientras que durante la fase 2, los resultados del grupo transanal fueron comparables a los del grupo laparoscópico. Los resultados muestran que durante la fase 3, el tiempo operatorio, la pérdida de sangre intraoperatoria y la estancia hospitalaria postoperatoria fueron menores que en el grupo laparoscópico. La recurrencia local ocurrió en 3 pacientes durante la fase 1 y en 1 paciente durante la fase 2.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio fue un estudio retrospectivo pequeño y se centró en un solo cirujano que realizaba la escisión mesorrectal total transanal.CONCLUSIÓN:Los resultados a corto plazo e histopatológicos son similares en comparación entre el grupo transanal y el grupo laparoscópico emparejado. La escisión mesorrectal total transanal también proporcionó buenos resultados oncológicos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B450.

Risk factors for small bowel obstruction after open rectal cancer resection.

BACKGROUND: Small bowel obstruction (SBO) is observed in around 10% of patients with prior open abdominal surgery. Rectal resection causes the highest readmission rates. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for readmission for SBO and causes for SBO in patients who needed surgery following rectal cancer surgery. METHODS: A population-based registry with prospectively gathered data on 752 consecutive patients with rectal cancer who underwent open pelvic surgery between January 1996 and January 2017 was used. Univariable and multivariable regression analysis was performed, and the risk of SBO was assessed. RESULTS: In total, 84 patients (11%) developed SBO after a median follow-up time of 48 months. Of these patients, 57% developed SBO during the 1st year after rectal cancer surgery. Surgery for SBO was performed in 32 patients (4.3%), and the cause of SBO was stoma-related in one-fourth of these patients. In the univariable analysis previous RT and re-laparotomy were found as risk factors for readmission for SBO. Re-laparotomy was an independent risk factor for readmission for SBO (OR 2.824, CI 1.129-7.065, P = 0.026) in the multivariable analysis, but not for surgery for SBO. Rectal resection without anastomoses, splenic flexors mobilization, intraoperative bleeding, operative time were not found as risk factors for SBO. CONCLUSIONS: One-tenth of rectal cancer patients who had open surgery developed SBO, most commonly within the 1st postoperative year. The risk of SBO is greatest in patients with complications after rectal cancer resection that result in a re-laparotomy.

Is the current referral trend a threat to the Military Health System? Perioperative outcomes and costs after colorectal surgery in the Military Health System versus civilian facilities.

BACKGROUND: TRICARE military beneficiaries are increasingly referred for major surgeries to civilian hospitals under "purchased care." This loss of volume may have a negative impact on the readiness of surgeons working in the "direct-care" setting at military treatment facilities and has important implications under the volume-quality paradigm. The objective of this study is to assess the impact of care source (direct versus purchased) and surgical volume on perioperative outcomes and costs of colorectal surgeries. METHODS: We examined TRICARE claims and medical records for 18- to 64-year-old patients undergoing major colorectal surgery from 2006 to 2015. We used a retrospective, weighted estimating equations analysis to assess differences in 30-day outcomes (mortality, readmissions, and major or minor complications) and costs (index and total including 30-day postsurgery) for colorectal surgery patients between purchased and direct care. RESULTS: We included 20,317 patients, with 24.8% undergoing direct-care surgery. Mean length of stay was 7.6 vs 7.7 days for direct and purchased care, respectively (P = .24). Adjusted 30-day odds between care settings revealed that although hospital readmissions (odds ratio 1.40) were significantly higher in direct care, overall complications (odds ratio 1.05) were similar between the 2 settings. However, mean total costs between direct and purchased care differed ($55,833 vs $30,513, respectively). Within direct care, mean total costs ($50,341; 95% confidence interval $41,509-$59,173) were lower at very high-volume facilities compared to other facilities ($54,869; 95% confidence interval $47,822-$61,916). CONCLUSION: Direct care was associated with higher odds of readmissions, similar overall complications, and higher costs. Contrary to common assumptions regarding volume and quality, higher volume in the direct-care setting was not associated with fewer complications.

A Protocol is not Enough: Enhanced Recovery Program-Based Care and Clinician Adherence Associated with Shorter Stay After Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Randomised trials have shown an Enhanced Recovery Program (ERP) can shorten stay after colorectal surgery. Previous research has focused on patient compliance neglecting the role of care providers. National data on implementation and adherence to standardised care are lacking. We examined care organisation and delivery including the ERP, and correlated this with clinical outcomes. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire was administered to surgeons and nurses in August-October 2015. All English National Health Service Trusts providing elective colorectal surgery were invited. Responses frequencies and variation were examined. Exploratory factor analysis was performed to identify underlying features of care. Standardised factor scores were correlated with elective clinical outcomes of length of stay, mortality and readmission rates from 2013-15. RESULTS: 218/600 (36.3%) postal responses were received from 84/90 (93.3%) Trusts that agreed to participate. Combined with email responses, 301 surveys were analysed. 281/301 (93.4%) agreed or strongly agreed that they had a standardised, ERP-based care protocol. However, 182/301 (60.5%) indicated all consultants managed post-operative oral intake similarly. After factor analysis, higher hospital average ERP-based care standardisation and clinician adherence score were significantly correlated with reduced length of stay, as well as higher ratings of teamwork and support for complication management. CONCLUSIONS: Standardised, ERP-based care was near universal, but clinician adherence varied markedly. Units reporting higher levels of clinician adherence achieved the lowest length of stay. Having a protocol is not enough. Careful implementation and adherence by all of the team is vital to achieve the best results.

The impact of an enhanced recovery program (ERP) on the costs of colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery Programs (ERPs) benefit patients but their effects on healthcare costs remain unclear. This study aimed to investigate the costs associated with a colorectal ERP in a large academic health system. METHODS: Patients who underwent colorectal surgery from 2012 to 2014 (pre-ERP) and 2015-2017 (ERP) were propensity score matched based on patient and operative-level characteristics. Primary outcomes were median variable, fixed, and total costs. Secondary outcomes included length-of-stay (LOS), readmissions, and postoperative complications (POCs). RESULTS: 616 surgical cases were included. Patient and operative-level characteristics were similar between the cohorts. Variable costs were $1028 less with ERP. ERP showed savings in nursing, surgery, anesthesiology, pharmacy, and laboratory costs, but had higher fixed costs. Total costs between the two groups were similar. ERP patients had significantly shorter LOS (-1 day, p < 0.01), but similar 30-day readmission rates and overall POCs. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an ERP for colorectal surgery was associated with lower variable costs compared to pre-ERP.

Prognostic Impact of Extranodal Extension in Rectal Cancer Patients Undergoing Radical Resection After Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Extranodal extension (ENE) of nodal metastasis has emerged as an important prognostic factor in many malignancies, including rectal cancer. However, its significance in patients with rectal cancer receiving preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) has not been extensively investigated. We therefore assessed ENE and its prognostic impact in a large series of consecutive rectal cancer patients with lymph node metastasis after PCRT and curative resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 2000 and December 2014, a total of 1925 patients with rectal cancer underwent surgical resection after PCRT. Medical records of 469 patients with pathologic node positivity were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: Of the 469 patients, 118 (25.2%) presented with ENE. ENE was observed more frequently in those with advanced tumor stage (higher ypT, ypN, and ypStage), lymphovascular invasion, and perineural invasion. Five-year disease-free survival rate was lower in patients with ENE-positive tumors than those with ENE-negative tumors (36.1% vs. 52.3%, P = .003). Similarly, 5-year overall survival rate was lower in patients with ENE-positive tumors than those with ENE-negative tumors (60.2% vs. 70.6%, P < .001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the presence of ENE was an independent poor prognostic factor for disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.412; 95% confidence interval, 1.074-1.857; P = .013) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.531; 95% confidence interval 1.149-2.039; P = .004). CONCLUSION: The presence of ENE in patients with rectal cancer undergoing PCRT is a negative prognostic factor, reflecting poor survival outcome.

Trends in Primary Surgical Resection and Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer, 2000-2016.

BACKGROUND: When, whether, and in whom primary tumor resection (PTR) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) is indicated remains unknown. With advances in multiagent systemic chemotherapy, PTR may be undertaken less frequently. The aim of this study was to obtain estimates of changes in the utilization of PTR and chemotherapy for metastatic CRC. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with metastatic CRC between 2000 and 2016 were identified from Surveillance Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) registry. Multivariable logistic regression defined odds of undergoing PTR. The analysis was also stratified by primary site (colon vs. rectum), age (younger than 50 vs. 50 y and older), and whether patients also underwent resection of metastatic sites (yes vs. no). The secondary endpoint of interest was the receipt of any chemotherapy, also assessed by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 99,835 patients with metastatic CRC, 55,527 (55.7%) underwent PTR. The odds of undergoing PTR decreased with a later year of diagnosis, with patients diagnosed in 2016 being 61.1% less likely to undergo surgery than those diagnosed in 2000 (adjusted odds ratio=0.39, 95% confidence interval: 0.36-0.42, P<0.0001; absolute percentage: 62.3% to 43.8%). Similar trends by year for PTR were observed among each of the subgroups, although patients with colon primary, young adults (age younger than 50 y), and patients also undergoing metastasectomy were more likely to undergo PTR (P<0.001 for all). In contrast, the odds of receiving chemotherapy increased dramatically with a later year of diagnosis (adjusted odds ratio=2.21, 95% confidence interval: 2.04-2.40, P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: From 2000 to 2016, there was a sharp decline in the rate of PTR for patients with metastatic CRC, while the use of chemotherapy increased over the same period. Prospective studies are needed to define the optimal local treatment for patients with metastatic CRC.

Gender differences in stage at diagnosis and preoperative radiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have examined gender differences in the clinical management of rectal cancer. We examine differences in stage at diagnosis and preoperative radiotherapy in rectal cancer patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in 22 hospitals in Spain including 770 patients undergoing surgery for rectal cancer. Study outcomes were disseminated disease at diagnosis and receiving preoperative radiotherapy. Age, comorbidity, referral from a screening program, diagnostic delay, distance from the anal verge, and tumor depth were considered as factors that might explain gender differences in these outcomes. RESULTS: Women were more likely to be diagnosed with disseminated disease among those referred from screening (odds ratio, confidence interval 95% (OR, CI = 7.2, 0.9-55.8) and among those with a diagnostic delay greater than 3 months (OR, CI = 5.1, 1.2-21.6). Women were less likely to receive preoperative radiotherapy if they were younger than 65 years of age (OR, CI = 0.6, 0.3-1.0) and if their tumors were cT3 or cT4 (OR, CI = 0.5, 0.4-0.7). CONCLUSIONS: The gender-specific sensitivity of rectal cancer screening tests, gender differences in referrals and clinical reasons for not prescribing preoperative radiotherapy in women should be further examined. If these gender differences are not clinically justifiable, their elimination might enhance survival.

International variation in managing locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer: prospective benchmark analysis.

BACKGROUND: Tumour extension beyond the mesorectal plane (ymrT4) occurs in 5-10 per cent of patients with rectal cancer and 10 per cent of patients develop locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after primary surgery. There is global variation in healthcare delivery for these conditions. METHODS: An international benchmark trial of the management of ymrT4 tumours and LRRC was undertaken in France and Australia between 2015 and 2017. Heterogeneity in management and operative decision-making were analysed by comparison of surgical resection rates, blinded intercountry reading of pelvic MRI, quality-of-life assessment and qualitative evaluations. RESULTS: Among 154 patients (97 in France and 57 in Australia), 31·8 per cent had ymrT4 disease and 68·2 per cent LRRC. The surgical resection rates were 88 and 79 per cent in France and Australia respectively (P = 0·112). The concordance in operative planning was low (κ = 0·314); the rate of pelvic exenteration was lower in France than Australia both in clinical practice (36 of 78 versus 34 of 40; P < 0·001) and in theoretical conditions (10 of 25 versus 50 of 57; P = 0·002). The R0 resection rate was lower in France than Australia for LRRC (25 of 49 versus 18 of 21; P = 0·007) but not for ymrT4 tumours (21 of 26 versus 15 of 15; P = 0·139). Morbidity rates were similar. Patients who underwent non-exenterative procedures had higher scores on the mental functioning subscale at 12 months (P = 0·047), and a lower level of distress at 6 months (P = 0·049). Qualitative analysis highlighted five categories of psychosocial factors influencing treatment decisions: patient, strategy, specialist, organization and culture. CONCLUSION: This international benchmark trial has highlighted the differences in worldwide treatment of locally advanced and LRRC. Standardized care should improve outcomes for these patients.

ANTECEDENTES: La extensión del tumor más allá del plano del meso-rrecto (ymrT4) ocurre en el 5-10% de los pacientes con cáncer de recto y el 10% de los pacientes desarrollan recidiva local del cáncer de recto (locally recurrent rectal cáncer, LRRC) después de una cirugía primaria. Existe una variación global en la prestación de la asistencia sanitaria para esta pato-logía. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un ensayo de referencia internacional sobre el manejo de ymrT4 y LRRC en Francia y Australia entre 2015 y 2017. La heterogeneidad en el manejo y la toma de decisiones quirúrgicas se analizaron mediante la comparación de las tasas de resección quirúrgica, la lectura a ciegas de la resonancia magnética (RM) pélvica entre países, la evaluación de la calidad de vida y las evaluaciones cualitativas. RESULTADOS: De 154 pacientes (97 en Francia versus 57 en Australia), el 32% tenía ymrT4 y el 68% tenía cáncer de recto con recidiva local. Las tasas de resección quirúrgica fueron del 87,6% versus 77,8% (P = 0,112). La tasa de concordancia en la decisión quirúrgica fue baja (coeficiente kappa = 0,314) con una tasa más baja de exenteración pélvica en Francia, tanto en la práctica clínica (46% versus 85%; P < 0,0001) como en condiciones teóricas (40% versus 88%; P = 0,002). La tasa de resección R0 fue menor en Francia para la LRRC (51% versus 86%, P = 0,007) pero no para el ymrT4 (81% versus 100%, P = 0,139). Las tasas de morbilidad fueron similares. Los pacientes que se sometieron a procedimientos no exenterativos tuvieron una subescala de funcionamiento mental más alta a los 12 meses (P = 0,04) y un nivel de angustia más bajo a los 6 meses (P = 0,04). El análisis cualitativo destacó 5 categorías de factores psicosociales que afectaron a la decisión del tratamiento: paciente, estrategia, especialista, organización y cultura. CONCLUSIÓN: Este ensayo de referencia internacional destaca las diferencias en el tratamiento mundial del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado y de la LRR. La aten-ción estandarizada debería mejorar los resultados para estos pacientes.