A preoperative prediction model for anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection based on 13.175 patients.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to develop a robust preoperative prediction model for anastomotic leakage (AL) after surgical resection for rectal cancer, based on established risk factors and with the power of a large prospective nation-wide population-based study cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A development cohort was formed by using the DCRA (Dutch ColoRectal Audit), a mandatory population-based repository of all patients who undergo colorectal cancer resection in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18 years or older were included who underwent surgical resection for rectal cancer with primary anastomosis (with or without deviating ileostomy) between 2011 and 2019. Anastomotic leakage was defined as clinically relevant leakage requiring reintervention. Multivariable logistic regression was used to build a prediction model and cross-validation was used to validate the model. RESULTS: A total of 13.175 patients were included for analysis. AL was diagnosed in 1319 patients (10%). A deviating stoma was constructed in 6853 patients (52%). The following variables were identified as significant risk factors and included in the prediction model: gender, age, BMI, ASA classification, neo-adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy, cT stage, distance of the tumor from anal verge, and deviating ileostomy. The model had a concordance-index of 0.664, which remained 0.658 after cross-validation. In addition, a nomogram was developed. CONCLUSION: The present study generated a discriminative prediction model based on preoperatively available variables. The proposed score can be used for patient counselling and risk-stratification before undergoing rectal resection for cancer.

National differences in implementation of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer and the influence on short-term outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The timing and degree of implementation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer vary among countries. Insights in national differences regarding implementation of new surgical techniques and the effect on postoperative outcomes are important for quality assurance, can show potential areas for country-specific improvement, and might be illustrative and supportive for similar implementation programs in other countries. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate differences in patient selection, applied techniques, and results of minimal invasive surgery for colorectal cancer between the Netherlands and Sweden. METHODS: Patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for T1-3 colon or rectal cancer (2012-2018) registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit or Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry were included. Time trends in the application of MIS were determined. Outcomes were compared for time periods with a similar level of MIS implementation (Netherlands 2012-2013 versus Sweden 2017-2018). Multilevel analyses were performed to identify factors associated with adverse short-term outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 46,095 Dutch and 8,819 Swedish patients undergoing MIS for colorectal cancer were included. In Sweden, MIS implementation was approximately 5 years later than in the Netherlands, with more robotic surgery and lower volumes per hospital. Although conversion rates were higher in Sweden, oncological and surgical outcomes were comparable. MIS in the Netherlands for the years 2012-2013 resulted in a higher reoperation rate for colon cancer and a higher readmission rate but lower non-surgical complication rates for rectal cancer if compared with MIS in Sweden during 2017-2018. CONCLUSION: This study showed that the implementation of MIS for colorectal cancer occurred later in Sweden than the Netherlands, with comparable outcomes despite lower volumes. Our study demonstrates that new surgical techniques can be implemented at a national level in a controlled and safe way, with thorough quality assurance.

Textbook outcome after rectal cancer surgery as a composite measure for quality of care: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Textbook outcome is a composite measure of combined outcome indicators, which has been suggested to be of additional value over single outcome parameters in clinical auditing of surgical treatment. This study aimed to assess textbook outcome after rectal cancer surgery as short-term marker for quality of care. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent elective rectal cancer surgery between 2012 and 2019 and registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit were included. Textbook outcome was achieved when the following criteria were met: 30-day and primary hospital admission survival, no reintervention, tumour-free margins, no postoperative complications, a hospital stay of less than 14 days and no readmission. Hospital variation was evaluated in case-mix corrected funnel-plots. A multilevel logistic regression analysis was performed to identify associated factors with textbook outcome. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 20,521 patients who underwent primary rectal cancer surgery, of whom 56.3% achieved textbook outcome. Postoperative complications were the main contributor to not achieving textbook outcome. Case-mix corrected funnel plots demonstrated that underperforming hospitals in 2012-2015 were no underperformers in 2016-2019 anymore. Female sex, laparoscopic surgery, and rectal resection without defunctioning stoma creation were positively associated with textbook outcome. CONCLUSION: Textbook outcome after rectal cancer resection is mainly driven by postoperative complications. Although textbook outcome showed some discriminating value for identifying underperforming hospitals, it does not fit the plan-do-check-act cycle of clinical auditing. In our opinion, textbook outcome has little added value to the current outcome indicators for rectal cancer surgery.

A 10-Year Evaluation of Short-Term Outcomes After Synchronous Colorectal Cancer Surgery: a Dutch Population-Based Study.

BACKGROUND: Synchronous colorectal cancer (CRC) has been associated with higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rates compared to solitary CRC. The influence of improved CRC care and introduction of screening on these outcomes remains unknown. This study aimed to evaluate time trends in incidence, population characteristics, and short-term outcomes of synchronous CRC patients at the population level over a 10-year time period. METHODS: Data of all patients that underwent resection for primary CRC were extracted from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2010-2019). Analyses were stratified for solitary and synchronous colon and rectal cancer. Multilevel logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with pathological and surgical outcomes. RESULTS: Among 100,474 patients, 3.1% underwent surgery for synchronous CRC. A screening-related decrease for surgically treated left-sided solitary and synchronous colon cancer and a temporary increase for exclusively right-sided colon cancer were observed. Synchronous CRC patients had higher rates of complicated postoperative course, failure to rescue, and mortality. Bilateral synchronous colon cancer was more often treated with subtotal colectomy (25.4%) and demonstrated higher rates of surgical complications, reinterventions, prolonged hospital stay, and mortality than other synchronous tumor locations. DISCUSSION: National bowel screening resulted in contradictory effects on surgical resections for synchronous CRCs depending on sidedness. Bilateral synchronous colon cancer required more often extended resection resulting in significantly worse outcomes than other synchronous tumor locations. Identification of low volume, high complex CRC subpopulations is relevant for individualized care and has implications for case-mix correction and benchmarking in clinical auditing.

Local recurrence after local excision of early rectal cancer: a meta-analysis of completion TME, adjuvant (chemo)radiation, or no additional treatment.

BACKGROUND: The risks of local recurrence and treatment-related morbidity need to be balanced after local excision of early rectal cancer. The aim of this meta-analysis was to determine oncological outcomes after local excision of pT1-2 rectal cancer followed by no additional treatment (NAT), completion total mesorectal excision (cTME) or adjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy (aCRT). METHODS: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library. The primary outcome was local recurrence. Statistical analysis included calculation of the weighted average of proportions. RESULTS: Some 73 studies comprising 4674 patients were included in the analysis. Sixty-two evaluated NAT, 13 cTME and 28 aCRT. The local recurrence rate for NAT among low-risk pT1 tumours was 6·7 (95 per cent c.i. 4·8 to 9·3) per cent. There were no local recurrences of low-risk pT1 tumours after cTME or aCRT. The local recurrence rate for high-risk pT1 tumours was 13·6 (8·0 to 22·0) per cent for local excision only, 4·1 (1·7 to 9·4) per cent for cTME and 3·9 (2·0 to 7·5) per cent for aCRT. Local recurrence rates for pT2 tumours were 28·9 (22·3 to 36·4) per cent with NAT, 4 (1 to 13) per cent after cTME and 14·7 (11·2 to 19·0) per cent after aCRT. CONCLUSION: There is a substantial risk of local recurrence in patients who receive no additional treatment after local excision, especially those with high-risk pT1 and pT2 rectal cancer. The lowest recurrence risk is provided by cTME; aCRT has outcomes comparable to those of cTME for high-risk pT1 tumours, but shows a higher risk for pT2 tumours.

ANTECEDENTES: Tras una resección temprana de un cáncer de recto localizado, hay que considerar el equilibrio entre el riesgo de recidiva local y la morbilidad relacionada con el tratamiento. El objetivo de este metaanálisis era determinar los resultados oncológicos tras la resección de un cáncer de recto pT1-T2 seguida de ningún tratamiento adicional (no additional treatment, NAT), escisión total del mesorrecto (completion total mesorectal excision, cTME) o quimiorradioterapia adyuvante (adjuvant chemoradiotherapy, aCRT). METHODS: Se llevó a cabo una búsqueda sistemática en PubMed, Embase y biblioteca Cochrane. La variable principal de resultado era la recidiva local (local recurrence, LR). En el análisis estadístico se calcularon las medias ponderadas de proporciones. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron en el análisis 76 estudios con un total de 4.793 pacientes. NAT fue evaluada en 72 estudios, cTME en 13 y aCRT en 28. La tasa de LR para NAT en tumores pT1 de bajo riesgo era de 6,7% (i.c. del 95% 4,8-9,3). No se observaron casos de LR en tumores pT1 de bajo riesgo tras cTME o aCRT. La tasa de LR para tumores pT1 de alto riesgo fue de 13,6% (i.c. del 95% 8,0-22,0) para la resección local como único tratamiento, 4,1% (i.c. del 95% 1,7-9,4) para cTME y 3,9% (i.c. del 95% 2,0-7,5) para aCRT. La tasa de LR para tumores pT2 fue de 28,9% (i.c. del 95% 22,3-36,4) para NAT, 4,3% (i.c. del 95% 1,4-12,5) para cTME y 14,7% (i.c. del 95% 11,2-19,0) para aCRT. CONCLUSIÓN: Tras la resección local de cáncer pT1 de alto riesgo y pT2, existe un riesgo sustancial de recidiva local en ausencia de tratamiento adicional. La escisión total del mesorrecto se asocia con el menor riesgo de recidiva. La quimiorradioterapia adyuvante ofrece resultados similares a la escisión total del mesorrecto en tumores pT1 de alto riesgo, pero presenta un mayor riesgo en tumores pT2.

MRI cT1-2 rectal cancer staging accuracy: a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Adequate MRI-based staging of early rectal cancers is essential for decision-making in an era of organ-conserving treatment approaches. The aim of this population-based study was to determine the accuracy of routine daily MRI staging of early rectal cancer, whether or not combined with endorectal ultrasonography (ERUS). METHODS: Patients with cT1-2 rectal cancer who underwent local excision or total mesorectal excision (TME) without downsizing (chemo)radiotherapy between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2018 were selected from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit. The accuracy of imaging was expressed as sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value. RESULTS: Of 7382 registered patients with cT1-2 rectal cancer, 5539 were included (5288 MRI alone, 251 MRI and ERUS; 1059 cT1 and 4480 cT2). Among patients with pT1 tumours, 54·7 per cent (792 of 1448) were overstaged by MRI alone, and 31·0 per cent (36 of 116) by MRI and ERUS. Understaging of pT2 disease occurred in 8·2 per cent (197 of 2388) and 27·9 per cent (31 of 111) respectively. MRI alone overstaged pN0 in 17·3 per cent (570 of 3303) and the PPV for assignment of cN0 category was 76·3 per cent (2733 of 3583). Of 834 patients with pT1 N0 disease, potentially suitable for local excision, tumours in 253 patients (30·3 per cent) were staged correctly as cT1 N0, whereas 484 (58·0 per cent) and 97 (11·6 per cent) were overstaged as cT2 N0 and cT1-2 N1 respectively. CONCLUSION: This Dutch population-based analysis of patients who underwent local excision or TME surgery for cT1-2 rectal cancer based on preoperative MRI staging revealed substantial overstaging, indicating the weaknesses of MRI and missed opportunities for organ preservation strategies.

ANTECEDENTES: Una adecuada estadificación mediante resonancia magnética nuclear (RMN) de los cánceres de recto en estadios precoces es esencial para la toma de decisiones en una era en la existen diferentes opciones de tratamiento preservadoras del recto. El objetivo de este estudio de base poblacional fue determinar la precisión de la estadificación mediante RMN del cáncer de recto precoz en la práctica diaria, ya sea combinada o no con la ecografía endorectal (endorectal ultrasound, ERUS). MÉTODOS: Los pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio cT1-2 que se sometieron a resección local o resección total del mesorrecto (total mesorectal excision, TME) sin (quimio) radioterapia neoadyuvante fueron seleccionados a partir del registro auditado ColoRectal holandés, entre el 1 de enero de 2011 y el 31 de diciembre de 2018. La precisión de las imágenes se expresó como sensibilidad, especificidad y valores predictivos positivo y negativo (positive- and negative predicting value, PPV / NPV). RESULTADOS: De un total de 7.382 pacientes registrados con cáncer de recto en estadio cT1-2, se incluyeron 5.539 pacientes (5.288 solamente RMN, 251 RMN + ERUS; 1.059 cT1 y 4.480 cT2). Los pacientes pT1 fueron sobreestadificados cuando se utilizó únicamente la RMN en un 54,7% de los casos (792/1.448) y cuando se combinó RMN y ERUS en un 31,0% (36/116). La infraestadificación de pT2 ocurrió en un 8,2% (197/2.388) y en un 27,9% (31/111), respectivamente. La RMN utilizada como única prueba sobreestadificó los casos pN0 en el 17,3% (570/3.303) y el VPP del estadio cN0 fue del 76,3% (2.733/3.583). De los 834 pacientes con estadio pT1N0, potencialmente adecuado para la resección local, 253 pacientes (30,3%) se clasificaron correctamente como cT1N0, y 484 (58,8%) y 97 (11,6%) pacientes se sobreestadificaron como cT2N0 y cT1-2N1, respectivamente. CONCLUSIÓN: Este estudio de base poblacional holandés en pacientes que se sometieron a una resección local o a cirugía TME por cáncer de recto cT1-2 con estadificación preoperatoria mediante RMN, muestra una considerable sobreestadificación, lo que indica las debilidades y oportunidades en las estrategias de preservación del recto.

International evaluation of circumferential resection margins after rectal cancer resection: insights from the Swedish and Dutch audits.

AIM: This study aimed to determine predictive factors for the circumferential resection margin (CRM) within two northern European countries with supposed similarity in providing rectal cancer care. METHOD: Data for all patients undergoing rectal resection for clinical tumour node metastasis (TNM) stage I-III rectal cancer were extracted from the Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry and the Dutch ColoRectal Audit (2011-2015). Separate analyses were performed for cT1-3 and cT4 stage. Predictive factors for the CRM were determined using univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 6444 Swedish and 12 089 Dutch patients were analysed. Over time the number of hospitals treating rectal cancer decreased from 52 to 42 in Sweden, and 82 to 79 in the Netherlands. In the Swedish population, proportions of cT4 stage (17% vs 8%), multivisceral resection (14% vs 7%) and abdominoperineal excision (APR) (37% vs 31%) were higher. The overall proportion of patients with a positive CRM (CRM+) was 7.8% in Sweden and 5.4% in the Netherlands. In both populations with cT1-3 stage disease, common independent risk factors for CRM+ were cT3, APR and multivisceral resection. No common risk factors for CRM+ in cT4 stage disease were found. An independent impact of hospital volume on CRM+ could be demonstrated for the cT1-3 Dutch population. CONCLUSION: Within two northern European countries with implemented clinical auditing, rectal cancer care might potentially be improved by further optimizing the treatment of distal and locally advanced rectal cancer.