The experience with colorectal cancer screening in the Czech Republic: the detection at earlier stages and improved clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains a major health burden. Although screening is recommended and considered beneficial, further data on its positive effects are needed for worldwide implementation. STUDY DESIGN: The aim of our national multicentre prospective observational study was to reveal and document clinicopathological differences in CRC diagnosed by screening and presented by disease symptoms as well as assess the efficiency of the screening programme in the Czech Republic. METHODS: Between March 2013 and September 2015, a total of 265 patients were enrolled in 12 gastroenterology centres across the Czech Republic. Patients were divided into screening and symptomatic groups and compared for pathology status and clinical characteristics. Screening was defined as a primary screening colonoscopy or a colonoscopy after a positive faecal occult blood test in an average-risk population. RESULTS: The distribution of CRC stages was significantly (statistically and clinically) favourable in the screening group (predominance of stages 0, I and II) compared with the non-screening group (P < 0.001). The presence of distant and local metastases was significantly less frequent in the screening group than in the symptomatic group (P < 0.001). Patients in the screening group had a higher probability of radical surgery (R0) than those diagnosed based on symptoms (P < 0.001). Systemic palliative treatment was indicated in two patients in the screening group compared with 23 patients in the non-screening group (P = 0.018). CONCLUSION: CRC diagnosed by screening disclosed less advanced clinicopathological characteristics and results in patients with a higher probability of radical surgery (R0) than diagnoses established based on symptoms, with subsequent management differing accordingly between both groups. These results advocate the implementation of a suitable worldwide screening programme.

Perioperative cardiovascular complications versus perioperative bleeding in consecutive patients with known cardiac disease undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Focus on antithrombotic medication. The PRAGUE-14 registry.

BACKGROUND: Interruption of antithrombotic treatment before surgery may prevent bleeding, but at the price of increasing cardiovascular complications. This prospective study analysed the impact of antithrombotic therapy interruption on outcomes in non-selected surgical patients with known cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: All 1200 consecutive patients (age 74.2 ± 10.2 years) undergoing major non-cardiac surgery (37.4 % acute, 61.4 % elective) during a period of 2.5 years while having at least one CVD were enrolled. Details on medication, bleeding, cardiovascular complications and cause of death were registered. RESULTS: In-hospital mortality was 3.9 % (versus 0.9 % mortality among 17,740 patients without CVD). Cardiovascular complications occurred in 91 (7.6 %) patients (with 37.4 % case fatality). Perioperative bleeding occurred in 160 (13.3 %) patients and was fatal in 2 (1.2 % case fatality). Multivariate analysis revealed age, preoperative anaemia, history of chronic heart failure, acute surgery and general anaesthesia predictive of cardiovascular complications. For bleeding complications multivariate analysis found warfarin use in the last 3 days, history of hypertension and general anaesthesia as independent predictive factors. Aspirin interruption before surgery was not predictive for either cardiovascular or for bleeding complications. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative cardiovascular complications in these high-risk elderly all-comer surgical patients with known cardiovascular disease are relatively rare, but once they occur, the case fatality is high. Perioperative bleeding complications are more frequent, but their case fatality is extremely low. Patterns of interruption of chronic aspirin therapy before major non-cardiac surgery are not predictive for perioperative complications (neither cardiovascular, nor bleeding). Simple baseline clinical factors are better predictors of outcomes than antithrombotic drug interruption patterns.