The prevalence of sarcopenia and cachexia in older patients with localized colorectal cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The incidence of colorectal cancer (CRC) increases with age. In combination with an ageing population, the number of older patients undergoing surgical treatment for CRC is therefore expected to increase. Sarcopenia and cachexia are potentially modifiable risk factors of a negative surgical outcome. Sarcopenia can be categorized into primary (age-related) and secondary where diseases, such as malignancy, are influential factors. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of preoperative sarcopenia and cachexia in older (≥65 years) vulnerable patients with localized CRC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients included in the randomized study "Geriatric assessment and intervention in older vulnerable patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer," were screened for sarcopenia and cachexia prior to surgery. All patients in the present cohort were considered vulnerable with Geriatric 8 ≤ 14 points. Sarcopenia was defined according to European Guidelines (EWGSOP2), based on low muscle strength-low handgrip-strength and/or slow 5xChair-Stand-Test-and low appendicular lean mass assessed by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Cachexia was defined as self-reported unintended weight loss >5% within three months or 2-5% with body mass index <20 kg/m2. RESULTS: Sixty-four patients (mean age 79.6 years ±6.4 years, 36 women) were assessed. Of these, 28% (n = 18, 11 women) had low muscle strength and 13% (n = 8, 4 women) fulfilled the criteria for sarcopenia, however, 33% (n = 21, 13 women) had low muscle mass. There was no correlation between low muscle strength and low muscle mass (r = 0.16, P = 0.22). The prevalence of cachexia was 36% (n = 23, 16 women). Low muscle mass was associated with cachexia (φ = 0.38, P = 0.005), but there was no association between sarcopenia and cachexia (φ = 0.01, P = 1.0). DISCUSSION: Despite the included patients who fulfilled the criteria for vulnerability according to G8, relatively few (28%) had low muscle strength. Moreover, there was poor overlap between the prevalence of sarcopenia according to the EWGSOP2 guidelines (13%) and prevalence of low muscle mass (33%) in older patients with CRC. Of note also, there was no association between sarcopenia and cachexia, but an association between cachexia and low muscle mass, which highlights the importance of assessing muscle mass in patients with cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The GEPOC trial has been prospectively registered at http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03719573).

The effect of intracorporeal versus extracorporeal anastomosis in robotic right colectomy on perianastomotic perfusion: a substudy to a multicenter RCT.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have shown that intracorporeal anastomosis (ICA) in minimally invasive right colectomy may improve postoperative recovery compared with extracorporeal anastomosis (ECA). It has been hypothesized that creating the anastomosis extracorporeally may cause mesenteric traction and compromised intestinal perfusion. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of either ICA or ECA on intestinal perfusion. METHOD: This was a substudy to a multicenter, triple-blind randomized clinical trial comparing ICA with ECA in patients undergoing robotic right colectomy for colonic cancer. Videos from intraoperative Indocyanine Green (ICG) fluorescence imaging were analyzed with quantitative ICG perfusion assessment (q-ICG). q-ICG was performed by extracting perfusion metrics from a time-intensity curve generated from an image analysis software: FMAX: maximal fluorescence intensity, TMAX: time until maximal fluorescent signal, T1/2MAX: time until half-maximal fluorescent signal, time ratio (T1/2MAX/TMAX) and slope. RESULTS: A total of 68 patients (33 ICA and 35 ECA) were available for analysis. Demographics were similar between the groups, except for mean arterial blood pressure at the time of ICG infusion, which was significantly lower in the ICA group. We found a significantly steeper slope in the ICA group compared to the ECA group (6.3 vs. 4.7 AU/sec, P = .048). There were no significant differences in FMAX, TMAX, T1/2MAX, and time ratio. CONCLUSION: We found evidence of an improved intestinal perfusion following ICA compared with ECA. This finding may be related to patient outcomes and should be explored further in the future. CLINICALTRIALS: gov NCT03130166.

Intracorporeal Versus Extracorporeal Anastomosis in Robotic Right Colectomy: A Multicenter, Triple-blind, Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if minimally invasive right colectomy with intra-corporeal anastomosis improves postoperative recovery compared to extra-corporeal anastomosis. BACKGROUND: Previous trials have shown that intracorporeal anastomosis improves postoperative recovery; however, it has not yet been evaluated in a setting with optimized perioperative care or with patient-related outcome measures. METHODS: This was a multicenter, triple-blind, randomized clinical trial at two high-volume colorectal centers with strict adherence to optimized perioperative care pathways. The patients underwent robotic right colectomy with either intracorporeal or extracorporeal anastomosis. The primary outcome was patient-reported postoperative recovery measured using the "Quality of Recovery-15" questionnaire. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03130166. RESULTS: A total of 89 patients were randomized and analyzed according to the "Intention-to-treat"-principle. We found no statistically significant differences in patient-reported recovery between the groups. Postoperative pain, nausea, time to ambulation, time to first passage of flatus/stool, length of hospital stay, and pathophysiological tests showed no differences either. The duration of time to create the anastomosis was significantly longer with intracorporeal anastomosis (17 vs 13 min, P = 0.003), while all other intraoperative, postoperative, and pathology variables showed no difference. CONCLUSION: There were no significant differences in postoperative recovery between the two groups.

Pre- and Perioperative Inflammatory Biomarkers in Older Patients Resected for Localized Colorectal Cancer: Associations with Complications and Prognosis.

The association between pre- and perioperative inflammatory biomarkers, major complications, and survival rates after resection of colorectal cancer (CRC) in older patients is largely unknown. The aim was to investigate age-dependent differences in these associations. Serum CRP, IL-6, and YKL-40 were measured preoperatively and on the first and second day after resection of CRC (stages I-III) in 210 older (≥70 years) and 191 younger patients (<70 years). The results from the complications was presented as an odds ratio (OR, with a 95% confidence interval (CI)) with logistic regression. Results from the mortality rates were presented as a hazard ratio (HR, with a 95% CI) using Cox proportional hazards regression. The preoperative inflammatory biomarkers were higher in the older vs. the younger patients. The risk of complications was increased in older patients with a high preoperative CRP (OR = 1.25, 95% CI 1.03-1.53), IL-6 (OR = 1.57, 95% CI 1.18-2.08), and YKL-40 (OR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.20-2.28), but not in younger patients. Mortality was higher in younger patients with high preoperative YKL-40 (HR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.06-2.60). This was not found in older patients. Elevated preoperative inflammatory biomarkers among older patients were associated with an increased risk of complications, but not mortality. Preoperative inflammatory biomarkers may be useful in assessing the risk of a complicated surgical course in older patients with CRC.

Electrochemotherapy for colorectal cancer using endoscopic electroporation: a phase 1 clinical study.

Background and study aims Electrochemotherapy is an anticancer treatment that uses electric pulses to facilitate uptake of chemotherapeutic drugs in tumor cells and has proven to have a high local cytotoxic effect with minimal adverse events. Electrochemotherapy has mostly been used in treatment of cutaneous metastases but development of a new endoscopic electrode device has made treatment of colorectal tumors possible. This first-in-man multicenter phase I study investigated safety and efficacy of electrochemotherapy using endoscopic electroporation in patients with colorectal tumors. Patients and methods Seven patients with colorectal tumors who were deemed ineligible for or had declined standard treatment were included. They were treated with bleomycin either intratumorally or intravenously and the electric pulses were delivered through the endoscopic electrode device. Safety and efficacy were assessed clinically and by scans immediately after treatment and adverse events were reported. Response was evaluated up to 6 months after treatment by scans (magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography) and endoscopic examinations. Results Seven patients aged 62 to 88 years with multiple comorbidities were included and had one or two treatments each. Post-treatment scans showed tumor responses in the treated areas and no damage to surrounding tissues. Only a few grade one adverse events were reported. Three patients had preoperative rectal bleeding, of which two reported cessation of bleeding and one reported decreased bleeding. Conclusion This first-in-man study shows that electrochemotherapy for colorectal tumors using the endoscopic electrode device can induce local tumor response and is safe also for fragile elderly patients with comorbidities.

Implementation of a multidisciplinary robotic centre in a high-volume university hospital.

INTRODUCTION: We describe the initiation of a multidisciplinary centre for robotic surgery including the implementation of robotic-assisted procedures as standard procedure for the majority of cancer operations in urology, gynaecology and gastrointestinal surgery. METHODS: All robotic procedures performed from 2008 to 2013 were included. The information gathered included body mass index, the American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status classification value (ASA), age, sex, time and type of surgery, duration of procedure, conversion to open surgery, length and type of anaesthesia, re-operations, length of hospital stay and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The implementation strategy was to start with one specialty at a time, passing on experience from one specialty to the next. The surgical strategy was to begin with standard procedures for which international experience was available and subsequently perform more complex procedures, ending up with robotic-assisted procedures as the standard for most cancer surgery procedures. A total of 2,473 procedures were performed. The operative time was reduced over the period for the main procedures of all three specialties. For prostatectomies, hysterectomies and colectomies, conversion to open surgery occurred in 1.2, 3.8 and 7.7%; the risk of re-operation was 0.2, 2.3 and 7.3%; and, finally, the 30-day mortality was 0.1, 0 and 1%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The implementation was possible as a stepwise introduction across three specialties with low conversion and re-operation rates and a low mortality. A high-volume centre for robotic surgery was developed and patients with malignant diagnoses were offered robotic-assisted surgery within the framework of multidisciplinary cooperation. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Danish Data Protection Agency R. No.: 2007-58-0015.

Robot-assisted rectopexy is a safe and feasible option for treatment of rectal prolapse.

INTRODUCTION: Rectal prolapse is seen in up to one in 100 elderly women and results in symptoms such as incontinence, mucus secretion and constipation. The aim of this study was to present short- and longterm outcomes after robot-assisted rectopexy in patients with rectal prolapse. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients diagnosed with rectal prolapse at our institution underwent robot-assisted rectopexy. Data regarding the surgical procedure and post-operative morbidity were collected retrospectively. Patients were contacted to register long-term results regarding recurrence, incontinence and satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 24 consecutive patients underwent robot-assisted rectopexy from October 2010 to July 2012. Data regarding their long-term outcome was available for 18 patients at follow-up (average ten months). 50% of the patients suffered from faecal incontinence before surgery (n = 9/18, 50%). The mean age at surgery was 72 years (28-93 years). The mean duration of surgery was 123 min. (70-245 min.). The median length of stay in hospital was 4.1 days (0-15 days). There was one procedure-related complication (small-bowel obstruction) resulting in reoperation. At the time of follow-up, two patients (11%) had a subjective recurrence of rectal prolapse, and three patients (17%) had faecal incontinence. 89% were satisfied with the operation, and 94% would recommend this operation to other patients with the same condition. CONCLUSION: Robot-assisted rectopexy is a safe procedure for patients with rectal prolapse and is associated with acceptable functional outcomes and recurrence rates. There is no evidence in the literature of advantages compared with the corresponding laparoscopic procedure. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

Early results after robot-assisted colorectal surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of robotic technology in surgery is challenging in many ways. The aim of this study was to present the implementation process and results of the first two years of consecutive robot-assisted laparoscopic (RAL) colorectal procedures. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study was a retrospective study of a consecutive, unselected patient population. All outcome parameters were predefined and all patients completed 30-day follow-up. All parameters were reported, including complication rate, reoperation rate and mortality. RESULTS: From April 2010 to April 2012, a total of 223 elective RAL colorectal procedures were performed. The procedures were grouped as follows: left colectomy/sigmoid resection (n = 65), low anterior resection (n = 50), abdominoperineal resection (n = 10), right colectomy (n = 56), rectopexia (n = 21), colectomy (n = 8), palliative procedure (n = 8) and stoma reversal (n = 8). The overall mortality rate was 0.4%; intra- and post-operative complication rates were 5.4% and 16%, respectively; and the reoperation rate was 9%. Conversion to open surgery was necessary in 9% of cases. A positive learning curve was found for low anterior resections with a significant decrease in duration of surgery over the course of the study period. CONCLUSION: RAL colorectal surgery can be performed as a standard procedure for most colorectal procedures. Appropriate staff education, surgical plan and quality assessment are necessary and we recommend a credentialing system for robotic surgery certification. Future randomized clinical trials should be performed to evaluate the short- and long-term results in these patients. FUNDING: not relevant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: not relevant.

No differences in short-term morbidity and mortality after robot-assisted laparoscopic versus laparoscopic resection for colonic cancer: a case-control study of 263 patients.

BACKGROUND: Robot-assisted laparoscopy has been reported to be a safe and feasible alternative to traditional laparoscopy. The aim of this study was to compare short-term results in patients with colonic cancer who underwent robot-assisted laparoscopic colonic resection (RC) or laparoscopic colonic resection (LC). METHODS: The study was a retrospective case control study of all patients with colonic cancer who underwent RC from March 2010 to March 2012 or LC from January 2009 to December 2011 at a tertiary-care university hospital. Data were retrieved from the national chart database and patient journals. Biochemical markers [C-reactive protein (CRP), hemoglobin, white blood cell count, and thrombocyte count] were recorded before surgery and for the first 3 days after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients underwent RC and 162 patients underwent LC. There were no significant differences in the rate of conversion to open surgery, number of permanent enterostomies, number of intraoperative complications, level of postoperative cellular stress response, number of postoperative complications, length of postoperative hospital stay, or 30-day mortality between the two groups. There was a significantly longer setup time for RC (77.1 vs. 69.7 min, P = 0.000), but surgical time was significantly shorter for RC (165.8 vs. 183.4 min, P = 0.006) and there was no difference in the overall procedure time (254.0 vs. 243.6 min, P = 0.086). CONCLUSION: We found RC to be a safe and feasible alternative to LC for colonic cancer. We found that for RC surgical time was shorter and overall procedure time was comparable to that for LC; however, these results should be confirmed in future randomized clinical trials.

Effect of intermediate care on mortality following emergency abdominal surgery. The InCare trial: study protocol, rationale and feasibility of a randomised multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Emergency abdominal surgery carries a 15% to 20% short-term mortality rate. Postoperative medical complications are strongly associated with increased mortality. Recent research suggests that timely recognition and effective management of complications may reduce mortality. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the effect of postoperative intermediate care following emergency major abdominal surgery in high-risk patients. METHODS AND DESIGN: The InCare trial is a randomised, parallel-group, non-blinded clinical trial with 1:1 allocation. Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy or laparoscopic surgery with a perioperative Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score of 10 or above, who are ready to be transferred to the surgical ward within 24 h of surgery are allocated to either intermediate care for 48 h, or surgical ward care. The primary outcome measure is all-cause 30-day mortality. We aim to enrol 400 patients in seven Danish hospitals. The sample size allows us to detect or refute a 34% relative risk reduction of mortality with 80% power. DISCUSSION: This trial evaluates the benefits and possible harm of intermediate care. The results may potentially influence the survival of many high-risk surgical patients. As a pioneer trial in the area, it will provide important data on the feasibility of future large-scale randomised clinical trials evaluating different levels of postoperative care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01209663.

Endoscopic sphincterotomy for common bile duct stones during laparoscopic cholecystectomy is safe and effective.

Management strategy for common bile duct (CBD) stones is controversial with several treatment options if stones in the CBD are recognized intraoperatively. The aim of this study was to report our experience with same-session combined endoscopic-laparoscopic treatment of gallbladder and CBD stones. We retrospectively evaluated 31 patients with cholecystolithiasis and CBD stones undergoing same-session combined endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy and endoscopic stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Same-session ERCP and sphincterotomy were performed in all patients, and stone extraction was successfully performed in 29 patients (93%) with 2 failures (7%) due to impacted stones. In 8 patients (26%), the laparoscopic procedure was converted to open cholecystectomy because of dense adhesions or unclear anatomy. Two patients (7%) developed mild pancreatitis postoperatively and no other morbidity or mortality. In conclusion, same-session ERCP with stone extraction and laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems to be a safe and effective treatment strategy for CBD stones.

No-trocar laparoscopic stoma creation.

Creation of an intestinal stoma may be necessary in a wide variety of colorectal diseases of both benign and malignant character. Open and laparoscopic techniques can be used for the fecal diversion. We report a case of a patient with a diverticulitis of the sigmoid colon with abscess formation and fistulation to the abdominal wall and vagina. Owing to severe comorbidity, a permanent fecal diversion was prepared. We performed a laparoscopic no-trocar technique. Only 1 incision, at the planned stoma site, was used. The abdominal wall was elevated with gaspers, no pneumoperitoneum or trocars were used. The laparoscope and reuseable laparoscopic graspers were introduced through the stoma site to correctly identify and grasp a loop of the terminal ileum. Finally, the loop ileostomy was placed on a bar. This laparoscopic technique is a valid alternative to standard laparoscopic stoma creation. Different techniques for stoma creation are discussed.

[Laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an outpatient procedure]. / Laparoskopisk kolecystektomi i dagkirurgisk regi.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to describe our experience with laparoscopic cholecystectomy as an outpatient procedure in terms of complications, same-day discharge, and a registration of patient' postoperative pain, convalescence and contact with general practitioners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective evaluation was done of the first 231 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in an outpatient clinic. RESULTS: Ninety per cent of the patients were discharged directly from the outpatient clinic, and a total of 93% of the patients were discharged within 24 hours of the operation. The readmission rate was 1%. Leakage from the cystic duct occurred in one case (0.4%), and no other injuries to the bile ducts were observed. The conversion rate was 1%. Within a week 54% of the patients had no pain and 55% of the patients had resumed normal activity. Postoperatively, 25% of the patients had contact with a general practitioner due to wound and other complaints that required no intervention. DISCUSSION: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is very suitable as an outpatient procedure due to its high same-day discharge rate and high patient satisfaction combined with low readmission and complication rates. Our study did expose, however, a high number of postoperative contacts with general practitioners due to non-surgical problems, which emphasizes the need for better patient information and cooperation with general practitioners to optimize the outpatient procedure further.

[Treatment of gallstone pancreatitis in Denmark]. / Behandlingen af galdestenspankreatitis i Danmark.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to describe the treatment of gallstone pancreatitis in Denmark and to compare it to the recommendations given in the National Reference Programme for the treatment of patients with gallstone disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to the 42 general surgical hospital departments in Denmark. RESULTS: All of the departments returned the questionnaire. All of them treated patients with gallstone pancreatitis; 40 of them performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The severity of gallstone pancreatitis was estimated in 29 departments. In patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis, 6 departments used ERCP in the evaluation of choledocholithiasis. In patients with mild gallstone pancreatitis who did not undergo an ERCP procedure with sphincterotomy, 13 departments performed laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the same admission after an acute attack. DISCUSSION: In agreement with the recommendations given in the National Reference Programme, the majority of Danish surgical departments used laparoscopic cholecystectomy in the treatment of patients with gallstone pancreatitis who had not undergone ERCP with sphincterotomy. To avoid the high recurrence of gallstone pancreatitis, laparoscopic cholecystectomy during the same admission is recommended. This recommendation was, however, followed by less than half of the surgical departments.