Elective versus emergency surgery for patients with colorectal cancer

Machine learning-based prediction of postoperative mortality in emergency colorectal surgery: A retrospective, multicenter cohort study using Tokushukai medical database

Background

Although prognostic factors associated with mortality in patients with emergency colorectal surgery have been identified, an accurate mortality risk assessment is still necessary to determine the range of therapeutic resources in accordance with the severity of patients. We established machine-learning models to predict in-hospital mortality for patients who had emergency colorectal surgery using clinical data at admission and attempted to identify prognostic factors associated with in-hospital mortality.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included adult patients undergoing emergency colorectal surgery in 42 hospitals between 2012 and 2020. We employed logistic regression and three supervised machine-learning models: random forests, gradient-boosting decision trees (GBDT), and multilayer perceptron (MLP). The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUROC) was calculated for each model. The Shapley additive explanations (SHAP) values are also calculated to identify the significant variables in GBDT.

Results

There were 8792 patients who underwent emergency colorectal surgery. As a result, the AUROC values of 0.742, 0.782, 0.814, and 0.768 were obtained for logistic regression, random forests, GBDT, and MLP. According to SHAP values, age, colorectal cancer, use of laparoscopy, and some laboratory variables, including serum lactate dehydrogenase serum albumin, and blood urea nitrogen, were significantly associated with in-hospital mortality.

Conclusion

We successfully generated a machine-learning prediction model, including GBDT, with the best prediction performance and exploited the potential for use in evaluating in-hospital mortality risk for patients who undergo emergency colorectal surgery.

Delaying surgery for optimization after colonic stent bridging is safe for left-sided malignant large bowel obstruction: Result from 10-year experience and risks factor analysis

AIM

To evaluate the operative and oncological results after colonic stent bridging for left-sided malignant large bowel intestinal obstruction and the risk factors for survival and recurrence after definitive surgery.

METHODOLOGY

Consecutive patients who underwent colonic stenting for malignant left-sided colonic obstruction were included. Patients for palliative stenting or emergency surgery, patient with low rectal tumour or peritoneal metastasis were excluded. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes included stent success rate, stenting related complications, rate of stoma formation and long-term oncological outcome including recurrence rate and recurrence free survival rate.

RESULTS

From June 2011 to June 2021, a total of 222 patients underwent colonic stenting. 112 patients were bridged to surgery after initial stenting, but 7 patients dropped out. Overall survival was 35 months (IQR = 17.75-75.25 months) in the early operation group, 30 months (IQR = 17.5-49.5 months) in the delayed surgery group HR 0.981 (95%CI 0.70-1.395, p = 0.907). Sensitivity analysis performed by excluding stent complications and emergency surgery yielded the same conclusion. Overall stenting complications rate was 17.1%. 11 patients (10.4%) required emergency surgery.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference between early and delayed surgery groups (>4weeks) in the overall survival and recurrence in patients who had stent-bridge to surgery for malignant left colonic obstruction. It is safe to defer definitive surgery to optimize patients and allow better recovery from initial obstruction after colonic stenting before definitive surgery without adversely affecting the oncological outcomes.

Relationships between multiple patient safety outcomes and healthcare and hospital-related risk factors in colorectal resection cases: cross-sectional evidence from a nationwide sample of 232 German hospitals

OBJECTIVES

Studies analysing colorectal resections usually focus on a specific outcome (eg, mortality) and/or specific risk factors at the individual (eg, comorbidities) or hospital (eg, volume) level. Comprehensive evidence across different patient safety outcomes, risk factors and patient groups is still scarce. Therefore the aim of this analysis was to investigate consistent relationships between multiple patient safety outcomes, healthcare and hospital risk factors in colorectal resection cases.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

German inpatient routine care data of colorectal resections between 2016 and 2018.

PARTICIPANTS

We analysed 54 168 colon resection and 20 395 rectum resection cases treated in German hospitals. The German Inpatient Quality Indicators were used to define colon resections and rectum resections transparently.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Additionally to in-hospital death, postoperative respiratory failure, renal failure and postoperative wound infections we included multiple patient safety outcomes as primary outcomes/dependent variables for our analysis. Healthcare (eg, weekend surgery), hospital (eg, volume) and case (eg, age) characteristics served as independent covariates in a multilevel logistic regression model. The estimated regression coefficients were transferred into ORs.

RESULTS

Weekend surgery, emergency admissions and transfers from other hospitals were significantly associated (ORs ranged from 1.1 to 2.6) with poor patient safety outcome (ie, death, renal failure, postoperative respiratory failure) in colon resections and rectum resections. Hospital characteristics showed heterogeneous effects. In colon resections hospital volume was associated with insignificant or adverse associations (postoperative wound infections: OR 1.168 (95% CI 1.030 to 1.325)) to multiple patient safety outcomes. In rectum resections hospital volume was protectively associated with death, renal failure and postoperative respiratory failure (ORs ranged from 0.7 to 0.8).

CONCLUSIONS

Transfer from other hospital and emergency admission are constantly associated with poor patient safety outcome. Hospital variables like volume, ownership or localisation did not show consistent relationships to patient safety outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10188560.

Determinants of emergency presentation in patients with colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Colorectal cancer remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, even despite curative treatment. A significant proportion of patients present emergently and have poorer outcomes compared to elective presentations, independent of TNM stage. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, differences between elective/emergency presentations of colorectal cancer were examined to determine which factors were associated with emergency presentation. A literature search was carried out from 1990 to 2018 comparing elective and emergency presentations of colon and/or rectal cancer. All reported clinicopathological variables were extracted from identified studies. Variables were analysed through either systematic review or, if appropriate, meta-analysis. This study identified multiple differences between elective and emergency presentations of colorectal cancer. On meta-analysis, emergency presentations were associated with more advanced tumour stage, both overall (OR 2.05) and T/N/M/ subclassification (OR 2.56/1.59/1.75), more: lymphovascular invasion (OR 1.76), vascular invasion (OR 1.92), perineural invasion (OR 1.89), and ASA (OR 1.83). Emergencies were more likely to be of ethnic minority (OR 1.58). There are multiple tumour/host factors that differ between elective and emergency presentations of colorectal cancer. Further work is required to determine which of these factors are independently associated with emergency presentation and subsequently which factors have the most significant effect on outcomes.

Safety of anastomoses in colorectal cancer surgery in octogenarians: a prospective cohort study with propensity score matching

Background

Up to 20 per cent of all operations for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) are performed in octogenarians. Anastomotic leakage is a leading cause of morbidity and death after resection for CRC. The aim of this study was to assess the rate of anastomosis creation, the risk of anastomotic leakage and death in surgery for left-sided CRC in elderly patients.

Methods

This prospective cohort study compared patients less than 80 and 80 or more years with left-sided CRC resection performed between 2013 and 2019. Data were provided from a risk-adjusted surgical quality-assessment system with 219 participating centres in Germany. Outcome measures were the rate of anastomoses, anastomotic leakages, death at 30 days and 2-year overall survival (OS). Propensity score matching was used to control for selection bias and compare subgroups of patients of less than 80 and 80 or more years.

Results

Out of 18 959 patients, some 3169 (16.7 per cent) were octogenarians. Octogenarians were less likely to receive anastomoses (82.0 versus 92.9 per cent, P < 0.001; odds ratio 0.50 (95 per cent c.i. 0.44 to 0.58), P < 0.001). The rate of anastomotic leakages did not differ between age groups (8.6 versus 9.7 per cent, P = 0.084), but 30-day mortality rate after leakage was significantly higher in octogenarians (15.8 versus 3.5 per cent, P < 0.001). Overall, anastomotic leakage was the strongest predictor for death (odds ratio 4.95 (95 per cent c.i. 3.66 to 6.66), P < 0.001). In the subgroup with no leakage, octogenarians had a lower 2-year OS rate than younger patients (71 versus 87 per cent, P < 0.001), and in the population with anastomotic leakage, the 2-year OS was 80 per cent in younger and 43 per cent in elderly patients (P < 0.001). After propensity score matching, older age remained predictive for not receiving an anastomosis (odds ratio 0.54 (95 per cent c.i. 0.46 to 0.63), P < 0.001) and for death (odds ratio 2.60 (95 per cent c.i. 1.78 to 3.84), P < 0.001), but not for the occurrence of leakages (odds ratio 0.94 (95 per cent c.i. 0.76 to 1.15), P = 0.524).

Conclusion

Anastomotic leakage is not more common in octogenarians, but an age of 80 years or older is an independent factor for not receiving an anastomosis in surgery for left-sided CRC. The mortality rate in the case of leakage in octogenarians was reported to exceed 15 per cent.

Clinical characteristics and survival of colorectal cancer patients in Korea stratified by age

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This nationwide study was undertaken to determine differences in clinicopathologic characteristics and survival of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) according to age using big data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service (NHIS).

METHODS

The NHIS data including quality assessment of CRC by the Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service in Korea between 2011 and 2014 were analyzed. Based on age, patients were divided into three groups: not-old patients (< 65), young-old patients (65 to 74 years old) and old-old patients (≥ 75 years old).

RESULTS

We included 71,513 CRC patients. The median follow-up duration was 3.2 years (range, 0.003 to 5.5). Male patients constituted 60%. The median age of patients was 65 years (range, 18 to 102). Colon was the cancer site in 59.8% of not-old patients, 62.9% of young-old patients, and 66.1% of old-old patients. Compared to not-old patients, young-old and old-old patients were more likely to be diagnosed with colon adenocarcinoma and well/moderate differentiation or adequate differentiation (all p < 0.001). Old patients underwent more emergency operation (p < 0.001) and received less adjuvant therapy in stage I-III (p < 0.001). The probability of 3-year survival of young-old or old-old patients was worse than that for not-old patients (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.46 to 1.64) (HR, 3.19; 95% CI, 3.03 to 3.37).

CONCLUSION

Old patients with CRC show different histology from younger patients. They are more frequently to have colon as primary lesion. They undergo less adjuvant therapy. Further studies and evidence-based guidelines for older patients with CRC are warranted to improve their outcome.

Colonic Stents as a Bridge to Surgery Compared with Immediate Resection in Patients with Malignant Large Bowel Obstruction in a NY State Database

BACKGROUND

There is controversy surrounding the efficacy and safety of colonic stents as a bridge to surgery compared with immediate resection in patients presenting with an acute malignant large bowel obstruction.

METHODS

Retrospective longitudinal cohort study using the NYS SPARCS Database. Patients with acute malignant large bowel obstruction who either had stent followed by elective surgery within 3 weeks (bridge to surgery) or underwent immediate resection between October 2009 and June 2016 in the state of New York were included. The primary outcome was rate of stoma creation at index resection. Secondary outcomes were 90-day readmission, reoperation, procedural complications, and discharge disposition.

RESULTS

A total of 3059 patients were included, n = 2917 (95.4%) underwent an immediate resection and n = 142 (4.6%) underwent bridge to surgery. We analyzed 139 patients in propensity score-matched groups. Patients in the bridge to surgery group were less likely than those in the immediate resection group to get a stoma at the time of surgery (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.60). They were also less likely to be discharged to a rehabilitation facility or require a home health aide upon discharge (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.22-0.61). There were no differences in rates of 90-day readmission, reoperation, or procedural complications between groups.

DISCUSSION

Colonic stenting as a bridge to surgery leads to less stoma creation, a significant quality of life advantage, compared with immediate resection. Patients should be counseled regarding these potential benefits when the technology is available.

Endoscopic Decompression in Colonic Distension

Background

Acute colonic distension is a medical emergency with high morbidity and mortality. Clinically important causes of colonic distension are acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction. Endoscopic decompression is one established therapeutic strategy.

Summary

This therapeutic review will give an overview of possible therapeutic strategies based on the recently published literature, focusing on endoscopic decompression and summarizing the other therapeutic possibilities. The review discusses separately the therapeutic options of acute colonic pseudo-obstruction, colonic volvulus, and malignant obstruction, providing an evidence-based orientation for clinical use.

Key Messages

Endoscopic decompression of colonic distension is an established therapy with high clinical success. The technique and its position in the therapy sequence differ depending on the medical condition, the trigger of the colonic distension, and the local expertise.

A Comparison of Open and Laparoscopic-assisted Colectomy for Obstructive Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND/AIM

We performed a retrospective multi-center cohort analysis to compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery for obstructive colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 455 patients with colon cancer with ileus underwent surgery at Yokohama City University Hospital and four related institutions from April 2000 to March 2016.

RESULTS

There were 414 cases in the open surgery group and 41 cases in the laparoscopic surgery group with no marked differences in the gender or age. The postoperative complication rate, according to the Clavien-Dindo classification, was lower in the laparoscopic group compared to the open surgery group. The postoperative hospital stay was 16 days in the open surgery group and 9 days in the laparoscopic surgery group (p=0.004). Among the various factors examined, the operation approach was identified as a statistically significant independent risk factor for postoperative complications (p=0.015).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative treatment for colon cancer with ileus and elective laparoscopic surgery are thought to be useful for achieving curative treatment, avoiding colostomy, and shortening the length of hospital stay.

Endoscopic Management of Malignant Colonic Obstruction

Advanced colorectal cancer can cause acute colonic obstruction, which is a life-threatening condition that requires emergency bowel decompression. Malignant colonic obstruction has traditionally been treated using emergency surgery, including primary resection or stoma formation. However, relatively high rates of complications, such as anastomosis site leakage, have been considered as major concerns for emergency surgery. Endoscopic management of malignant colonic obstruction using a self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) was introduced 20 years ago and it has been used as a first-line palliative treatment. However, endoscopic treatment of malignant colonic obstruction using SEMSs as a bridge to surgery remains controversial owing to short-term complications and longterm oncological outcomes. In this review, the current status of and recommendations for endoscopic management using SEMSs for malignant colonic obstruction will be discussed.

Oncologic long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Long-term outcomes in patients undergoing emergency versus elective resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) are discussed controversially. This study aims to assess long-term outcomes of emergency versus elective CRC surgery.

METHODS

Single-center retrospective cohort study. Patients undergoing emergency or elective CRC surgery from July 2002 to January 2013 were included. Primary outcome was 5-year survival, secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality and local tumor recurrence.

RESULTS

Overall, 475 patients were included. Median age was 69.0 (IQR 59.0-77.0) years. A total of 141 patients (30%) were operated for rectal cancer and 334 patients (70%) for colon cancer. Median follow-up was 445 (IQR 67-1409) days. Emergency resection was performed in 105 patients (22%) due to obstruction, perforation, or bleeding. Stage IV tumors and ASA scores≥ 3 were significantly more frequent in the emergency than in the elective resection group (39.0% vs. 33.5%, p < 0.001; 75.5% vs. 61.3%, p = 0.003). The rate of patients with positive lymph nodes was similar in the two groups (46.2% vs. 46.3%, p = 1.000). In-hospital mortality was significantly higher in the emergency CRC versus the elective CRC group (8.4% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.023). Five-year survival (aHR 1.38; 95%CI 0.81-2.37, p = 0.237) or local tumor recurrence (aHR 1.48; 95%CI 0.47-4.66, p = 0.500) were not significantly different in patients undergoing emergency versus elective surgery for CRC.

CONCLUSION

In-hospital mortality was increased in emergency versus elective CRC resections. However, 5-year survival and local recurrence after surgery for CRC were determined by the tumor stage, and not by the emergency versus elective setting of surgical resection.

Histotype influences emergency presentation and prognosis in colon cancer surgery

AIM

To investigate whether differences in histotype in colon cancer correlate with clinical presentation and if they might influence oncological outcomes and survival.

METHODS

Data regarding colon cancer patients operated both electively or in emergency between 2009 and 2014 were retrospectively collected from a prospectively maintained database and analyzed for the purpose of this study. Rectal cancer was excluded from this analysis. Statistical univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to investigate possible significant variables influencing clinical presentation, as well as oncological outcomes and survival.

RESULTS

Data from 219 patients undergoing colorectal resection for cancer of the colon only were retrieved. One hundred seventy-four patients had an elective procedure and forty-five had an emergency colectomy. Emergency presentation was more likely to occur in mucinous (p < 0.05) and signet ring cell (p < 0.01) tumors. No definitive differences in 5-year overall (44.7% vs. 60.6%, p = 0.078) and disease-free (51.2% vs. 64.4%, p = 0.09) survival were found between the two groups as a whole, but the T3 emergency patients showed worse prognosis than the elective (p < 0.03). Lymph node invasion, laparoscopy, histology, and blood transfusions were independent variables found to influence survival. Distribution assessed for pTNM stage showed T3 cancers were more common in emergency (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

Mucinous and signet ring cell tumors are related to emergency presentation, pT3 stage, poorest outcomes, and survival. Disease-free survival in patients who had emergency surgery for T3 colon cancer seems related to the histotype.

Age at death and the effect of lead-time bias in patients with colorectal cancer: a 10-year follow-up

AIM

Studies addressing the benefit of early intervention are prone to lead-time bias, which results in an artificial improvement in cancer-specific mortality. We have previously compared the age at death for patients with colorectal cancer presenting on an emergency or elective basis. In this study, we aimed to repeat the analysis with a minimum follow-up of 10 years.

METHOD

A nonscreen-detected cohort of patients presenting with colorectal cancer to three Lanarkshire Hospitals between 2000 and 2006 were entered into a prospective database, with analysis performed on 28 November 2016. The following data were collected: age at death, presentation type (emergency/elective), operative intent (palliative/curative) and Dukes stage. Results are presented as [mean (95% confidence intervals)]. Statistical analysis was undertaken using Student's t-test and multivariate analysis performed using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

One thousand six hundred and thirty-six patients were identified. Elective patients presented younger than emergency patients [67.9 (67.3-68.5) vs 70.9 (69.6-72.2) years; P < 0.0001]. Overall mortality was 71.1% at time of analysis; no difference was seen in the mean age at death between emergency and elective presentation [73.5 (72.4-74.8) vs 73.6 (72.3-74.9) years; P = 0.841].

CONCLUSION

Current early detection strategies to diagnose colorectal cancer may improve cancer-specific survival by increasing lead-time bias. However, in our cohort of symptomatic patients, treatment on an elective or emergency basis does not influence overall survival. These data suggest that in selected patients, particularly where there is comorbidity, it may be reasonable to adopt a more expectant approach to investigate and treat colorectal symptoms.

Regional Differences in Palliative Care Utilization Among Geriatric Colorectal Cancer Patients Needing Emergent Surgery

BACKGROUND

The benefits of palliative care (PC) in critical illness are validated across a range of diseases, yet it remains underutilized in surgical patients. This study analyzed patient and hospital factors predictive of PC utilization for elderly patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) requiring emergent surgery.

METHODS

The National Inpatient Sample was queried for patients aged ≥ 65 years admitted emergently with CRC from 2009 to 2014. Patients undergoing colectomy, enterectomy, or ostomy formation were included and stratified according to documentation of PC consultation during admission. Chi-squared testing identified unadjusted group differences, and multivariable logistic regression identified predictors of PC.

RESULTS

Of 86,573 discharges meeting inclusion criteria, only 3598 (4.2%) had PC consultation. Colectomy (86.6%) and ostomy formation (30.4%) accounted for the operative majority. PC frequency increased over time (2.9% in 2009 to 6.2% in 2014, P < 0.001) and was nearly twice as likely to occur in the West compared with the Northeast (5.7 vs. 3.3%, P < 0.001) and in not-for-profit compared with proprietary hospitals (4.5 vs. 2.3%, P < 0.001). PC patients were more likely to have metastases (60.1 vs. 39.9%, P < 0.001) and die during admission (41.5 vs. 6.4%, P < 0.001). On multivariable logistic regression, PC predictors (P < 0.05) included region outside the Northeast, increasing age, more recent year, and metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

In the USA, PC consultation for geriatric patients with surgically managed complicated CRC is low. Regional variation appears to play an important role. With mounting evidence that PC improves quality of life and outcomes, understanding the barriers associated with its provision to surgical patients is paramount.

Long-term oncological outcomes following emergency resection of colon cancer

PURPOSE

The relationship between emergency colon cancer resection and long-term oncological outcomes is not well understood. Our objective was to characterize the impact of emergency resection for colon cancer on disease-free and overall patient survival.

METHODS

Data on patients undergoing resection for colon cancer from 2006 to 2015 were collected from a prospectively maintained clinical and administrative database. The median follow-up time was 4.4 years. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the hazard ratios for recurrence and death for patients treated with surgery for an emergent presentation. Differences in initiation of, and timeliness of, adjuvant chemotherapy between emergently and electively treated patients were also examined.

RESULTS

Of the 1180 patients who underwent resection for stages I, II, or III colon cancer, 158 (13%) had emergent surgery. After adjustment for patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics, the HR for recurrence was 1.64 (95% CI 1.12-2.40) and for death was 1.47 (95% CI 1.10-1.97). After adjustment for tumor characteristics, patients who underwent emergency resection were similarly likely to receive adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 1.1; 95% CI 0.70-1.76). The time from surgery to initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy was also similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency surgery for localized or regional colon cancer is associated with a greater risk of recurrence and death. This association does not appear to be due to differences in adjuvant treatment. A focus on screening and colon cancer awareness in order to reduce emergency presentations is warranted.

Endoscopic stenting should be advocated in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer presenting with acute obstruction

Background

It remains contentious whether endoscopic stenting or upfront surgery is more optimal in patients with metastatic colorectal cancers presenting with large bowel obstruction.

Methods

A retrospective review of all patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who underwent either endoscopic stenting or emergency surgery for acute large bowel obstruction was performed.

Results

Between January 2007 and June 2014, 66 patients, median age, 64 (range, 25-96) years, presented with acute large bowel obstruction from metastatic colorectal cancer. Forty (60.6%) patients underwent endoscopic stenting whilst the rest received immediate upfront surgical intervention. Of the 40 patients, 29 (72.5%) were successfully stented. The remaining 11 (27.5%) patients who failed endoscopic stenting required immediate emergency surgery to relieve the obstruction. Patients who failed endoscopic stenting had worse complications than those patients who had their stents successfully inserted [odds ratio (OR), 23.3; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.29-250.00, P=0.004]. Patients who underwent emergency surgery had a longer median length of stay than patients who had successful endoscopic stenting (P=0.003). The patients that underwent successful stenting had earlier commencement of chemotherapy compared to those who had upfront surgery (P=0.02). There was no difference in stoma creation rates between patients who had emergency surgery versus those who were successfully stented.

Conclusions

Stenting is a safe option in patients with stage IV colorectal cancer presenting with acute large bowel obstruction. Earlier commencement of chemotherapy occurs in patients who were successfully stented. Patients who failed stenting have equivalent outcomes to those who undergone upfront emergency surgery.

Early and Late Outcome after Surgery for Colorectal Cancer Elective versus Emergency Surgery

Aims and Background

Emergency surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rate and a poor long-term outcome compared with elective surgery. The aim of the present study was to compare early and late outcome after elective and emergency surgery for malignant colorectal cancer, looking for the principal determinants of a worse outcome after emergency colorectal surgery.

Methods

A retrospective study of 236 patients presenting with colorectal cancer over an 8-year period was undertaken. Of these, 118 presented as emergencies, whereas 118 patients, well matched for age, sex, site of tumor and TNM admitted as elective, were included in the study. Data reviewed included postoperative mortality and morbidity and long-term outcome.

Results

The 30-day operative mortality rate was significantly higher in the emergency group than in the electively treated group (11.9% versus 3.4%, P<0.01). The higher mortality rate was observed in the perforation group. The 30-day operative morbidity was higher in the emergency group (27.1% versus 12.7%, P <0.05). Anastomotic failure was a serious complication: following primary resection, we observed 4 non-fatal (5.4%) and two fatal (2.7%) anastomotic leaks after 74 primary anastomoses. Among emergency-treated patients, the procedures characterized by the highest percentage of postoperative complications were three-stage resections (63.6%). The 5-year survival rate was greater after elective surgery (59% versos 39%).

Conclusions

The early and long-term outcome following emergency colorectal surgery was significantly lower than that after elective surgery. Although medical complications in patients with end-stage cancer played an important role, surgical failures still had an important impact on outcome.

Review of risk assessment tools to predict morbidity and mortality in elderly surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Informed surgical consent requires accurate estimation of risks and benefits. Multiple risk assessment tools are available; however, most are not widely used or are specific to certain interventions. Assessing surgical risk is especially challenging in elderly patients because of their range of comorbidities, level of frailty, or severity of illness and a number of available surgical interventions.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE from January 2014 to July 2017 for studies that used risk assessment tools in studies on elderly surgical patients. We then sought the original articles describing each assessment tool and subsequent validation studies.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified risk assessment tools that can improve surgical risk assessment in elderly surgical patients. The majority of the identified tools are not commonly used for pre-operative risk assessment. NSQIP-PMP, mFI and SURPAS are promising tools. Age is commonly used to predict risk, but frailty may be a more appropriate measure.

Randomized controlled trial of colonic stent insertion in non-curable large bowel obstruction: a post hoc cost analysis

AIM

In view of the increasing burden on the healthcare system, this study aims to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of the management of incurable large bowel obstruction comparing the cost of a stent vs surgery.

METHOD

A prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at two major teaching hospitals in Australia between September 2006 and November 2011. Fifty-six patients with malignant incurable large bowel obstruction were randomized to stent insertion or surgical decompression, of whom 52 were included in the final analysis. Data were collected at all points during the patient journey and quality of life data were obtained by patient surveys. All data points were analysed and a cost-effectiveness study was performed to compare the costs between the two treatment groups.

RESULTS

Stenting as a procedure was significantly more expensive than surgery (A$4462.50 vs A$3251.50; P < 0.001). Post-procedure stay for stented patients was significantly lower (median 7 vs 11 days; P = 0.03). Combined costs of stent group ward stay, multidisciplinary team discussion and complication management were significantly lower (P = 0.013). Overall cost difference between the two treatment groups was A$3902.44 (P = 0.101). European Quality of Life - 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) scores for the first 4 weeks gave mean area under the curve adjusted weeks of 2.411 vs 2.271 for the stent and surgery groups respectively (P = 0.603). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between the surgery and the stent group was $22 955.53 in favour of stenting.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with stenting is cheaper than open surgery and provides quicker discharge from hospital.

Investigation of clinicopathological parameters in emergency colorectal cancer surgery: a study of 67 patients

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the present study was to establish, having adjusted for case mix, the size of the differences in postoperative mortality and 5-year survival between patients presenting as an emergency with evidence of obstruction and perforation and the association of clinicopathological factors with mortality (bivariate analyses).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 67 patients who presented with colorectal cancer (CRC) between 2009 and 2013 in Iran. The mean age of the patients was 59.7 years. Of the 67 patients, 37 (55.22%) were male and 30 (44.77%) were female. Certain parameters that correlated with CRC and surgical treatment were investigated.

RESULTS

Our results showed that 46 (68.65%) patients had obstruction, while perforation was observed in 21 (31.34%) cases. Among the patients with obstruction, obstruction of the right colon was observed in 29 (43.28%) cases. There was no significant difference in mortality rate between right and left colonic obstruction. Based on the bivariate analyses, our findings showed that death of patients was significantly related to tumor grade (p = 0.02) and TNM staging (p = 0.026), but no association was found between other parameters and death, including age, sex, and tumor site.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with patients who undergo elective surgery for colon cancer, those who present as an emergency with evidence of obstruction or perforation have higher postoperative mortality rates and poorer cancer-specific survival. Also, colorectal cancer patients with emergency surgery showed aggressive histopathology and an advanced stage.

Stent as bridge to surgery for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction reduces adverse events and stoma rate compared with emergency surgery: results of a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Twenty years after the first description of the technique, the debate is still open on the role of self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement as a bridge to elective surgery for symptomatic left-sided malignant colonic obstruction. The aim was to compare morbidity rates after colonic stenting bridge to surgery (SBTS) versus emergency surgery (ES) for left-sided malignant obstruction.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on SBTS or ES for acute symptomatic malignant left-sided large bowel obstruction. The primary outcome was overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis included 8 RCTs and 497 patients. Overall mortality within 60 days after surgery was 9.6% in SBTS-treated patients and 9.9% in ES-treated patients (relative risk [RR], 0.99; P = .97). Overall morbidity within 60 days after surgery was 33.9% in SBTS-treated patients and 51.2% in ES-treated patients (RR, 0.59; P = .023). The temporary stoma rate was 33.9% after SBTS and 51.4% after ES (RR, 0.67; P < .001). The permanent stoma rate was 22.2% after SBTS and 35.2% after ES (RR, 0.66; P = .003). Primary anastomosis was successful in 70.0% of SBTS-treated patients and 54.1% of ES-treated patients (RR, 1.29; P = .043).

CONCLUSIONS

SBTS was associated with lower short-term overall morbidity and lower rates of temporary and permanent stoma. Depending on multiple factors such as local expertise, clinical status including level of obstruction, and level of certainty of diagnosis, SBTS does offer some advantages with less risk than ES for left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in the short term.

An Analysis of Emergency Department Visits and the Survival Rate for Colorectal Cancer Patients: A Nationwide Population-based Study

Objective We examined the general characteristics, survival rate, and most common reasons for visiting the emergency department (ED) among colorectal cancer patients in Taiwan. We performed a population-based retrospective study and used data sourced from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD). Methods The colorectal cancer patient population, their diagnosis, and their medical management at the ED were identified using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database 2000 (HV) codes and International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification system. We investigated their reasons for visiting the ED and the medications used there, analyzed their cumulative survival curves using the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared the survival curves with other colorectal cancer patients who had never visited the ED. Results Between 2000 and 2012, there were 6,532 ED visits by 3,347 colorectal patients, and the number per year increased gradually. The top three most common reasons for visiting ED were ill-defined conditions, abdominal pain, and intestinal obstruction. The overall survival rates of colorectal patients in the ED visit group at 3, 5, and 10 years, were 0.65, 0.56, and 0.47, respectively, without significant differences from the rates among colorectal cancer patients who did not visit the ED (p=0.2072). Conclusion We described the circumstances of ED visitation by colorectal cancer patients in Taiwan. Health care providers and researchers should pay more attention to improve medical care quality and investigate more details to predict the outcome among colorectal cancer patients.

Long-term Postprocedural Outcomes of Palliative Emergency Stenting vs Stoma in Malignant Large-Bowel Obstruction

Importance

Colonic stenting was introduced for palliation of malignant large-bowel obstruction (MLBO) more than 20 years ago but remains controversial.

Objective

To compare outcomes after palliative stenting vs stoma creation in patients with MLBO requiring emergency management.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This observational cohort study assessed 345 patients from New York State with an urgent or emergency admission to the hospital for obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer and who underwent stenting or stoma creation from October 1, 2009, through December 31, 2013. Patients were excluded if they underwent resection within 1 year of the index admission.

Exposures

Palliative stenting vs stoma creation.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcomes included subsequent operation and readmission within 90-day and 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital death, major medical and surgical complications, length of stay, total charges, and discharge dispositions. Multivariable hierarchical analyses and propensity score matching were used to compare outcomes between the exposure groups.

Results

The cohort included 345 patients (mean [SD] age, 69.9 [14.4] years in the stoma group and 70.9 [16.8] years in the stent group; 87 men [50.3%] in the stoma group and 90 [52.3%] in the stent group; and 114 non-Hispanic white patients [65.9%] in the stoma group and 90 [52.3%] in the stent group). Most patients undergoing stenting were treated at high-volume (104 [60.5%]) vs medium-volume (42 [24.4%]) or low-volume (26 [15.1%]) hospitals (P < .001). Patients undergoing stenting were significantly less likely to experience prolonged length of stay (odds ratio [OR], 0.50; 95% CI, 0.26-0.97; P = .04), more likely to be discharged to their usual residence (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.07-0.28; P < .001), and tended to have similar or fewer complications (major events: OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.30-2.18; P = .68; procedural complications: OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.11-1.22; P = .10). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of 90-day and 1-year readmission to the hospitals (90 days: OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.49-1.78; P = .83; 1 year: OR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.38-1.37; P = .30). Subsequent operation at 90 days was also not different between the groups (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 0.26-6.89; P = .72), but there was a higher chance of subsequent operation at 1 year after the stenting procedure (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.12-7.68; P = .03), with most subsequent operations being restenting.

Conclusions and Relevance

In patients with MLBO and if resection is not part of the treatment plan, stenting is safe and improves the efficiency of care with obvious quality-of-life benefits. It should be offered at experienced centers, and patients should be counseled regarding increased risk of subsequent stenting within 1 year.

Effects of multidisciplinary team on emergency care for colorectal cancer patients: A nationwide-matched cohort study

The literature describing the effectiveness of multidisciplinary team (MDT) for the care of colorectal cancer remains unclear. We investigated the effects of MDT care on the quality of colorectal cancer treatment, and the emergency department visit number was used as an indicator. In total, 45,418 patients newly diagnosed with colorectal cancer from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database (2005-2009) were included. Propensity score matching with a ratio of 1:3 was adopted to reduce differences in characteristics between MDT care participants and non-MDT care participants. After matching, 3039 participation MDT care groups and 9117 nonparticipation groups were included and analyzed with χ and t tests, determine the distribution was similar. Without the control of variables, the percentage difference between participation and nonparticipation MDT care groups in utilization of emergency care was 0.03% (P > .05). The logistic regression model involving controlled variables demonstrated that odds ratio (OR) by probability of emergency care used for participation MDT care groups within a year of cancer diagnosis was less than that for nonparticipation (OR = 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.78-0.96). Large amount data were used and confirmed significant benefits of MDT in colorectal cancer care.

Who requires emergency surgery for colorectal cancer and can national screening programmes reduce this need?

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing emergency colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery are at higher risk of poor outcome than those managed electively. The aim of this national study is to identify groups at high risk of undergoing unplanned CRC surgery and assess short and long-term outcome in this cohort subsequent morbidity and mortality as well as quantify their long-term survival. The aim of this national study is to identify groups at high risk of undergoing unplanned CRC surgery and assess short and long-term outcome, subsequent morbidity and mortality as well as quantify their long-term survival.

METHODS

The Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database between the years of 1997-2012 was used to identify all patients that had undergone surgery for colorectal cancer. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and cox regression analyses were undertaken to identify patient factors predictive of undergoing emergency and quantify their long-term survival.

RESULTS

A total of 286,591 patients underwent resection for CRC between April 1997 and April 2012, of which 24.3% (69,718 patients) were admitted as emergencies and underwent emergency surgery. Independent predictors of undergoing emergency surgery were female gender (OR 1.23, CI: 1.21-1.25, p < 0.001), older age (>79 years old OR 1.55, CI: 1.50-1.60, p < 0.001), social deprivation (most deprived quintile, OR 1.64, CI: 1.50-1.80, p < 0.001) and Black African/Caribbean ethnicity (OR 1.36, CI: 1.21-1.66, p < 0.001). All cause 30- and 90-day mortality within the emergency group was significantly higher than that for the electively managed patients group (13.3% versus compared with 3.4% at 30-days) as was 90-day (20.0% versus compared with 5.8% at 90-days). Amongst patients eligible for bowel screening there was an approximate 40% significant reduction in the proportion of patients requiring emergency surgery before and after its introduction in 2006 (23.4%-14.9%, p < 0.001). This reduction in emergency surgery included both proximal and distal cancer resections.

CONCLUSION

Older, socially deprived and ethnic minority patients with colorectal cancer are more likely to present as emergencies requiring CRC surgery. Public health initiatives, such as bowel cancer screening, appear to have concomitantly reduced emergency and increased elective surgical rates within the eligible cohort. This is likely to have a beneficial impact on population survival. Strategies aimed at preventing emergency presentation by identifying patients at specific risk could improve survival outcome for colorectal cancer surgery in England.

Effect of preoperative colonic drainage for obstructing colorectal cancer

Obstructing colorectal cancer (OCRC) is believed to indicate poorer long-term survival. The purpose of this study was to compare retrospectively perioperative safety and long-term results in patients undergoing surgery for OCRC following preoperative colonic decompression with that in those undergoing elective surgery alone for nonobstructing colorectal cancer (CRC). A total of 656 consecutive CRC patients undergoing colectomy between 2001 and 2011 at our institute were eligible for inclusion in the study. The patients were divided into an OCRC group, which included 104 patients undergoing colectomy with preoperative colonic decompression, and a CRC group, which included 552 patients undergoing colectomy alone. Morbidity, mortality, and prognosis were assessed. In the OCRC group, decompression was performed by nasointestinal tube in 42 patients (40.4%), transanal tube in 15 (14.4%), and colostomy in 47 (45.2%). The mortality rate was 0% in the OCRC group and 0.4% in the CRC group (2 of 552 patients). The morbidity rate was 44.8% in the OCRC group (48 of 104 patients) and 36.6% in the CRC group (202 of 552 patients). The 5-year overall survival rate was 69.5% in the OCRC group and 72.9% in the CRC group [hazard ratio 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.35 to 1.16; P = 0.48)]. No statistically significant difference in survival was observed between the 2 groups in stage II, III, or IV, or overall. No difference was observed in safety or survival between advanced OCRC patients undergoing preoperative colonic decompression and advanced non-obstructing CRC patients undergoing surgery alone.

Potentially preventable deaths in the Victorian Audit of Surgical Mortality

BACKGROUND

The Victorian Audit of Surgical Mortality (VASM) seeks to peer-review all deaths associated with surgical care. This study aimed to examine the mortalities that were determined by the assessor to be potentially preventable, and identify the clinical factors associated with these cases. The assessment of preventability of death and its relationship to management issues at different stages of the admission episode, as opposed to whether the management issue(s) alone were preventable have not been reported previously.

METHODS

Mortality data from the VASM audit since 2007 that completed the peer-review process were retrospectively analysed. Mortalities identified as being preventable were assessed to determine any treatment errors.

RESULTS

A total of 6155 deaths were assessed. Of these, 14.6% (896/6155) were considered to be potentially preventable. Where a second-line assessment was requested (1113/6155, 17.5% cases), 48.3% of these deaths were considered potentially preventable. Elective patient deaths were more likely to be potentially preventable (P < 0.001), especially in public patients. Lack of timely involvement of senior staff, inappropriate treatment delay and failure of problem recognition were factors most frequently associated with potentially preventable mortality.

CONCLUSION

Overall assessment of the preventability of death is unique to VASM. This allows an additional level of analysis to be applied to the circumstances surrounding each mortality and correlation of preventability of death with clinical management issues provides important feedback to surgeons and health-care providers to further improve the safety and quality of care.

Critical care provision after colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the 2nd largest cause of cancer related mortality in the UK with 40 000 new patients being diagnosed each year. Complications of CRC surgery can occur in the perioperative period that leads to the requirement of organ support. The aim of this study was to identify pre-operative risk factors that increased the likelihood of this occurring.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study of all 6441 patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery within the West of Scotland Region between 2005 and 2011. Logistic regression was employed to determine factors associated with receiving postoperative organ support.

RESULTS

A total of 610 (9 %) patients received organ support. Multivariate analysis identified age ≥65, male gender, emergency surgery, social deprivation, heart failure and type II diabetes as being independently associated with organ support postoperatively. After adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, patients with metastatic disease appeared less likely to receive organ support (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one in ten patients undergoing CRC surgery receive organ support in the post operative period. We identified several risk factors which increase the likelihood of receiving organ support post operatively. This is relevant when consenting patients about the risks of CRC surgery.

Cost-effectiveness of palliative surgery versus nonsurgical procedures in gastrointestinal cancer patients

Palliative care is an essential component to multidisciplinary cancer care. Improved symptom control, quality of life (QOL), and survival have resulted from its utilization. Cost-effectiveness and utility analyses are significant variables that should be considered in comparing benefits and costs of medical interventions to determine if certain treatments are economically justified. This is a review on the cost-effectiveness of palliative surgery compared to other nonsurgical palliative procedures in patients with unresectable gastrointestinal cancers. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:316-322. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Open surgery versus laparoscopic surgery after stent insertion for obstructive colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of laparoscopic surgery vs. open surgery after insertion of a colonic stent for obstructive colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Between April 2005 and August 2013, 58 patients underwent surgery after the insertion of a colonic stent for obstructive colorectal cancer. We analyzed the outcomes of the patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery vs. those who underwent open surgery.

RESULTS

We compared blood loss, operative time, hospital stay, and complications in 26 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery and 32 patients who underwent open surgery. Blood loss was significantly less in the laparoscopic surgery group, but operative time was significantly shorter in the open surgery group. The length of hospital stay was shorter in the laparoscopic surgery group than in the open surgery group, but the difference was not significant. There was no significant difference in postoperative surgical complications between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The patients who underwent laparoscopic resection had less blood loss, although no significant difference was found in postoperative morbidity or mortality. Thus, laparoscopic resection after stent insertion is a feasible and safe option for patients with obstructive colorectal cancer.

Urgent surgery after emergency presentation for colorectal cancer has no impact on overall and disease-free survival: a propensity score analysis

Background

It remains a matter of debate whether colorectal cancer resection in an emergency setting negatively impacts on survival. Our objective was therefore to assess the impact of urgent versus elective operation on overall and disease-free survival in patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer by using propensity score adjusted analysis.

Methods

In a single-center study patients operated for colorectal cancer between 1989 and 2013 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Median follow-up was 44 months. Patients with neoadjuvant treatment were excluded. The impact of urgent operation on overall and disease-free survival was assessed using both Cox regression and propensity score analyses.

Results

Of 747 patients with colorectal cancer, 84 (11 %) had urgent and 663 elective cancer resection. The propensity score revealed strongly biased patient characteristics (0.22 ± 0.16 vs. 0.10 ± 0.09; P < 0.001). In unadjusted analysis urgent operation was associated with a 35 % increased risk of overall mortality (hazard ratio(HR) of death = 1.35, 95 % confidence interval(CI):1.02–1.78, P = 0.045). In risk-adjusted Cox regression analysis urgent operation was not associated with poor overall (HR = 1.08, 95 %CI:0.79–1.48; P = 0.629) or disease-free survival (HR = 1.02, 95 %CI:0.76–1.38; P = 0.877). Similarly in propensity score analysis urgent operation did not influence overall (HR = 0.98, 95 % CI:0.74–1.29), P = 0.872) and disease-free survival (HR = 0.89, 95 %CI:0.68 to 1.16, P = 0.387).

Conclusions

This study provides evidence that worse oncologic outcomes after urgent operation for colorectal cancer are caused by clinical circumstances and not due to the urgent operation itself. Urgent operation is not a risk factor for colorectal cancer resection.

Providing Anesthesia Care in Resource-limited Settings

Background

Anesthesia is integral to improving surgical care in low-resource settings. Anesthesia providers who work in these areas should be familiar with the particularities associated with providing care in these settings, including the types and outcomes of commonly performed anesthetic procedures.

Methods

The authors conducted a retrospective analysis of anesthetic procedures performed at Médecins Sans Frontières facilities from July 2008 to June 2014. The authors collected data on patient demographics, procedural characteristics, and patient outcome. The factors associated with perioperative mortality were analyzed.

Results

Over the 6-yr period, 75,536 anesthetics were provided to adult patients. The most common anesthesia techniques were spinal anesthesia (45.56%) and general anesthesia without intubation (33.85%). Overall perioperative mortality was 0.25%. Emergent procedures (0.41%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 15.86; 95% CI, 2.14 to 115.58), specialized surgeries (2.74%; AOR, 3.82; 95% CI, 1.27 to 11.47), and surgical duration more than 6 h (9.76%; AOR, 4.02; 95% CI, 1.09 to 14.88) were associated with higher odds of mortality than elective surgeries, minor surgeries, and surgical duration less than 1 h, respectively. Compared with general anesthesia with intubation, spinal anesthesia, regional anesthesia, and general anesthesia without intubation were associated with lower perioperative mortality rates of 0.04% (AOR, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.18), 0.06% (AOR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.92), and 0.14% (AOR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.18 to 0.45), respectively.

Conclusions

A wide range of anesthetics can be carried out safely in resource-limited settings. Providers need to be aware of the potential risks and the outcomes associated with anesthesia administration in these settings.

Long-term outcomes after stenting as a “bridge to surgery” for the management of acute obstruction secondary to colorectal cancer

Obstructive symptoms are present in 8% of cases at the time of initial diagnosis in cases of colorectal cancer. Emergency surgery has been classically considered the treatment of choice in these patients. However, in the majority of studies, emergency colorectal surgery is burdened with higher morbidity and mortality rates than elective surgery, and many patients require temporal colostomy which deteriorates their quality of life and becomes permanent in 10%-40% of cases. The aim of stenting by-pass to surgery is to transform emergency surgery into elective surgery in order to improve surgical results, obtain an accurate tumoral staging and detection of synchronous lesions, stabilization of comorbidities and performance of laparoscopic surgery. Immediate results were more favourable in patients who were stented concerning primary anastomosis, permanent stoma, wound infection and overall morbidity, having the higher surgical risk patients the greater benefit. However, some findings laid out the possible implication of stenting in long-term results of oncologic treatment. Perforation after stenting is related to tumoral recurrence. In studies with perforation rates above 8%, higher recurrences rates in young patients and lower disease free survival have been shown. On the other hand, after stenting the number of removed lymph nodes in the surgical specimen is larger, patients can receive adjuvant chemotherapy earlier and in a greater percentage and the number of patients who can be surgically treated with laparoscopic surgery is larger. Finally, there are no consistent studies able to demonstrate that one strategy is superior to the other in terms of oncologic benefits. At present, it would seem wise to assume a higher initial complication rate in young patients without relevant comorbidities and to accept the risk of local recurrence in old patients (> 70 years) or with high surgical risk (ASA III/IV).

Treatment of perforated colon carcinomas-outcomes of radical surgery

PURPOSE

When patients present with a perforation of a colon cancer (CC), this situation increases the challenge to treat them properly. The question arises how to deal with these patients adequately, more restrictively or the same way as with elective cases.

METHODS

Between January 1995 and December 2009, 52 patients with perforated CC and 1206 nonperforated CC were documented in the Erlangen Registry of Colorectal Carcinomas (ERCRC). All these patients underwent radical resection of the primary including systematic lymph node dissection with CME. The median follow-up period was 68 months.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients in the perforated CC group was significantly higher than in the nonperforated CC group (p = 0.010). Significantly, more patients with perforated CC were classified in ASA categories 3 and 4 (p = 0.014). Hartmann procedures were performed significantly more frequently with perforation than with the nonperforated ones (p < 0.001). If an anastomosis was performed, the leakage rate of primary anastomoses did not differ (p = 1.0). Cancer-related survival was significantly lower with perforated cancer (difference 12.8 percentage points) and by 9.6 percentage points for observed survival, if postoperative mortality was excluded.

CONCLUSIONS

Perforated CC patients should be treated basically following the same oncologic demands, which are CME for colonic cancer including multivisceral resections, if needed. This strategy can only be performed if high-quality surgery is available, permanently.

Defining characteristics of patients with colorectal cancer requiring emergency surgery

INTRODUCTION

Emergency surgery for colorectal cancer has been associated with high mortality. The aim of this study is to determine factors predictive of undergoing emergency surgery, of 30-day mortality, and explore the role of screening in patients undergoing emergency surgery.

METHODS

All patients at our unit, undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer between 2004 and 2014 were included. Data on patient demographics, tumour staging, admission type, comorbidity score, mortality data, and screening data were analysed. Multivariable analyses were carried out to determine predictors of undergoing emergency surgery as well as mortality postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 1911 consecutive patients underwent elective and emergency surgery for colorectal cancer. Of the 263 patients who underwent emergency surgery for CRC, 37.3 % (n = 98) had right-sided colonic cancers. Multivariable analyses determined right-sided cancers (OR 2.92, 95 % CI 2.03-4.20, p < 0.001) and stage IV tumours to be independently associated with undergoing emergency surgery (OR 6.64, 95 % CI 2.86-15.42, p < 0.001). Undergoing emergency surgery was an independent predictor of 30-day mortality (OR 9.62, 95 % CI 5.96-15.54, p < 0.001). Of the 50 patients that died within 30 days in the emergency surgery group, 32 % were in patients with right-sided colon cancers. Cancer detection through guaiac faecal occult blood testing (gFOBT) amongst this group is low with six out of nine patients having a false negative gFOBT test.

CONCLUSION

Emergency CRC surgery is associated with high mortality. Alternative screening strategies that improve detection of proximal colon cancers may reduce the number of patients undergoing emergency surgery for right-sided cancers.

Temporal trends in mode, site and stage of presentation with the introduction of colorectal cancer screening: a decade of experience from the West of Scotland

Background:

Population colorectal cancer screening programmes have been introduced to reduce cancer-specific mortality through the detection of early-stage disease. The present study aimed to examine the impact of screening introduction in the West of Scotland.

Methods:

Data on all patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer between January 2003 and December 2012 were extracted from a prospectively maintained regional audit database. Changes in mode, site and stage of presentation before, during and after screening introduction were examined.

Results:

In a population of 2.4 million, over a 10-year period, 14 487 incident cases of colorectal cancer were noted. Of these, 7827 (54%) were males and 7727 (53%) were socioeconomically deprived. In the postscreening era, 18% were diagnosed via the screening programme. There was a reduction in both emergency presentation (20% prescreening vs 13% postscreening, P⩽0.001) and the proportion of rectal cancers (34% prescreening vs 31% pos-screening, P⩽0.001) over the timeframe. Within non-metastatic disease, an increase in the proportion of stage I tumours at diagnosis was noted (17% prescreening vs 28% postscreening, P⩽0.001).

Conclusions:

Within non-metastatic disease, a shift towards earlier stage at diagnosis has accompanied the introduction of a national screening programme. Such a change should lead to improved outcomes in patients with colorectal cancer.

Patients who failed endoscopic stenting for left-sided malignant colorectal obstruction suffered the worst outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reported outcomes of patients followed failed endoscopic stenting for acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction remained lacking.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare the outcomes between endoscopic stenting and emergency surgery in patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction and to identify factors that predict failed stenting.

METHODS

A retrospective review of all patients with acute left-sided malignant colonic obstruction in the National University Hospital, Singapore was performed.

RESULTS

From January 2007 to October 2013, 165 patients, with a median age of 68 years (range, 25-96), formed the study group. Sixty-nine (41.8 %) patients underwent immediate surgery. Endoscopic stenting was attempted in 96 (58.2 %) patients and was successful in 76 (79.2 %). The remaining 20 (20.8 %) failed the procedure and were operated immediately. Three of the patients who were successfully stented but did not improve clinically also required emergency surgery. Patients that failed stenting were 13.3 (95 % confidence interval (CI), 3.61-48.8; p < 0.001) times more likely to develop severe adverse events than those who were successfully stented. The group of patients who failed stenting was also 3.3 (95 % CI, 1.19-9.20; p = 0.026) times more likely to develop severe adverse events than those operated immediately. The only factor that predicted failure of stenting was a more acute angulation between the tumour and the distal lumen.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who failed endoscopic stenting fared worse than those who were successfully stented and also those who underwent emergency surgery upfront. Identification of factors that predict failures may be vital to minimise morbidity in these high-risk patients.

[Analysis of postoperative complications following acute surgery for colorectal cancer]

Our aim was to improve the outcome of emergency surgeries for colorectal cancer (CRC). Authors compared two periods: 2004-2006 and 2007-2011. Targeted cases were emergency admissions, in which the diagnosis of colorectal cancer is only revealed during work-up or during surgery. No other exclusion criteria were set. Analyzed main endpoints were anastomotic leak, postoperative mortality, resecability. ASA classification and TNM stages were assessed in order to learn morbidity and general condition prior to acute surgery. Considering the experience gained in prior period, in 2007, authors have made a change in treatment strategy. In following years leakage ratio became ten times lower and mortality was reduced by 5%. There is a great chance that fast work-up and preparation for surgery may decrease complications and mortality. The aim would be for CRC patients, is to reach surgery in an early stage of disease as possible, at least before complications develop.

Emergency presentation of node-negative colorectal cancer treated with curative surgery is associated with poorer short and longer-term survival

PURPOSE

The majority of patients with node-negative colorectal cancer have excellent 5-year survival prospects, but up to a third relapse. Strategies to identify patients at higher risk of adverse outcomes are desirable to enable optimal treatment and follow-up. The aim of this study was to examine postoperative mortality and longer-term survival by mode of presentation for patients with node-negative colorectal cancer undergoing surgery with curative intent.

METHODS

Patients from 16 hospitals in the west of Scotland between 2001 and 2004 were identified from a prospectively maintained regional clinical audit database. Postoperative mortality and 5-year relative survival by mode of presentation were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 1,877 patients with node-negative disease, 251 (13.4%) presented as an emergency. Those presenting as an emergency were more likely to be older (P = 0.023), have colon rather than rectal cancer (P < 0.001), have pT4 stage disease (P < 0.001), have extramural vascular invasion (P = 0.001), and receive surgery under the care of a nonspecialist surgeon (P < 0.001) compared to those presenting electively. The postoperative mortality rate was 3.3% after elective and 12.8% after emergency presentation (P < 0.001). Five-year relative survival was 91.8% after elective and 66.8% after emergency presentation (P < 0.001). The adjusted relative excess risk ratio for 5-year relative survival after emergency relative to elective presentation was 2.59 (95% CI 1.67-4.01; P < 0.001) and 1.90 (95% CI 1.00-3.62; P = 0.049) after exclusion of postoperative deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency presentation of node-negative colorectal cancer treated with curative intent was independently associated with higher postoperative mortality and poorer 5-year relative survival compared to elective presentation.

An acute care surgery service expedites the treatment of emergency colorectal cancer: a retrospective case-control study

Introduction

Emergency colorectal cancer (CRC) is a complex disease that requires multidisciplinary approaches for management. However, it is unclear whether acute care surgery (ACS) services can expedite the workup and treatment of complex surgical diseases such as emergency CRC. We sought to assess the impact of an Acute Care and Emergency Surgery Service (ACCESS) on wait-times for inpatient colonoscopy and surgical resection among emergency CRC patients.

Methods

This retrospective case–control study was conducted at a tertiary-care, university-affiliated, cancer centre in London, Ontario, Canada. All patients aged 18 or older who presented to the emergency department with a recent (within 48 hours) diagnosis of CRC, or were diagnosed with CRC after admission, were included in the study. Patients were either in the pre-ACCESS (July 1, 2007-June 31, 2010) or post-ACCESS (July 1, 2010-June 30, 2012) groups. A third group of emergency CRC patients treated at an adjacent cancer centre that lacked ACCESS (non-ACCESS) was evaluated separately. The primary outcome was time from admission to colonoscopy and surgery.

Results

A total of 149 patients (47 pre-ACCESS, 37 post-ACCESS, and 65 non-ACCESS) were identified. Only 19% (n = 9) of pre-ACCESS patients underwent inpatient colonoscopy, compared to 38% (n = 14) in the post-ACCESS group (p = 0.023). Additionally, 100% of patients in the post-ACCESS era underwent inpatient colonoscopy and surgery during the same admission, compared to only 44% of pre-ACCESS patients (p = 0.006). Median wait-times for inpatient colonoscopy (2.0 and 1.8 days for pre- and post-ACCESS groups respectively, p = 0.08) and surgical resection (1.6 and 2.3 days for pre- and post-ACCESS groups respectively, p = 0.40) were similar.

Conclusions

Patients admitted to ACCESS underwent more inpatient colonoscopies and were more likely to have definitive surgery on that admission. ACS services can facilitate the workup and management of complex surgical diseases such as emergency CRC without delaying treatment.

Survival outcome of operated and non-operated elderly patients with rectal cancer: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results analysis

BACKGROUND

With an ageing population, surgery is increasingly offered to elderly patients with rectal cancer, although outcomes for the oldest patients remain poorly defined. This study aimed to determine whether operative intervention improves outcome in elderly patients.

METHOD

Patients aged 18+ years diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma between 1998 and 2009 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. The primary endpoint was adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for 5-year cancer specific survival (CSS); the secondary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

With increasing age, patients were less likely to undergo surgery, receive a complete stage or receive neoadjuvant radiotherapy. CSS and OS increasingly diverged with age in patients undergoing surgery. Those aged 80+ had reduced CSS compared to those aged 70-79 years (stages I-III, respective adjusted HR 2.14, 1.58, 1.48, all p < 0.001). However, stage II patients aged 80+ treated with resection and neoadjuvant therapy had similar survival to those aged 70-79 years (adjusted HR 1.26, p = 0.149). For only patients aged 80+ years, those treated non-operatively had lower survival than those undergoing surgery, who in turn had the best survival when treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy (adjusted HR 0.74, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Contrary to common expectation, in patients aged over 80 with rectal cancer, surgery with or without other modalities was associated with better survival than non-operative treatment. Despite selection bias in this observational study, these findings support consideration of maximal therapy regardless of age in selected patients deemed to be fit, since this leads to outcomes equivalent to younger patients.

Impact of the Scottish Bowel Cancer Screening Programme on patient and tumour characteristics at a single centre

AIMS

The Scottish National Bowel Cancer Screening Programme aims to detect asymptomatic colorectal carcinomas and improve outcomes by identifying tumours at an earlier stage. We describe the characteristics of bowel cancers diagnosed through the screening programme since it was established in June 2007 by comparison with colorectal carcinomas from all other referral sources.

METHODS

All patients with colorectal cancer discussed by our regional colorectal multidisciplinary team (MDT) from June 2007 to August 2011 were included. Patient and tumour characteristics were collated prospectively from MDT records. The database was then reviewed retrospectively.

RESULTS

During the study 209 916 (58%) of 364 759 invitations to participate in screening were accepted yielding 3895 (1.9%) positive results. The 255 (17%) screening-detected (SD) patients and 1232 (83%) other referrals (ORs) were discussed at the MDT within this period. Median age at diagnosis was 65.5 years for SD vs. 71.6 in OR (P < 0.001) with 64% vs. 53% male [SD vs. OR (P < 0.001)]. There were more left-sided tumours in SD (P = 0.005). Tumours were less advanced in SD group (P = 0.02) and more likely to undergo a laparoscopic resection (P = 0.003). Thirty (11.7%) of SD patients were dead at last follow-up compared with 458 (37.2%) of those from other sources (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This cohort from a centre with an established screening programme supports the effect of screening in detecting earlier stage. Those with screen-detected tumours were more likely to survive than patients from the OR group.

Contribution of surgical specialization to improved colorectal cancer survival

BACKGROUND

Reorganization of colorectal cancer services has led to surgery being increasingly, but not exclusively, delivered by specialist surgeons. Outcomes from colorectal cancer surgery have improved, but the exact determinants remain unclear. This study explored the determinants of outcome after colorectal cancer surgery over time.

METHODS

Postoperative mortality (within 30 days of surgery) and 5-year relative survival rates for patients in the West of Scotland undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer between 1991 and 1994 were compared with rates for those having surgery between 2001 and 2004.

RESULTS

The 1823 patients who had surgery in 2001-2004 were more likely to have had stage I or III tumours, and to have undergone surgery with curative intent than the 1715 patients operated on in 1991-1994. The proportion of patients presenting electively who received surgery by a specialist surgeon increased over time (from 14·9 to 72·8 per cent; P < 0·001). Postoperative mortality increased among patients treated by non-specialists over time (from 7·4 to 10·3 per cent; P = 0·026). Non-specialist surgery was associated with an increased risk of postoperative death (adjusted odds ratio 1·72, 95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·17 to 2·55; P = 0·006) compared with specialist surgery. The 5-year relative survival rate increased over time and was higher among those treated by specialist compared with non-specialist surgeons (62·1 versus 53·0 per cent; P < 0·001). Compared with the earlier period, the adjusted relative excess risk ratio for the later period was 0·69 (95 per cent c.i. 0·61 to 0·79; P < 0·001). Increased surgical specialization accounted for 18·9 per cent of the observed survival improvement.

CONCLUSION

Increased surgical specialization contributed significantly to the observed improvement in longer-term survival following colorectal cancer surgery.

State-by-state variation in emergency versus elective colon resections: room for improvement

BACKGROUND

Compared with elective surgical procedures, emergency procedures are associated with higher cost, morbidity, and mortality. This study seeks to investigate potential state-by-state variations in the incidence of emergent versus elective colon resections.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all adult patients (aged ≥18 years) included in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2005 to 2009 who underwent hemicolectomy (right or left) or sigmoidectomy was conducted. Discharge-level weights were applied, and generalized linear models were used to assess the odds of a patient undergoing emergent versus elective colon surgery nationally and for each state after adjusting for patient and hospital factors. Odds ratios (ORs) were estimated with the national average as the reference.

RESULTS

The final study cohort included 203,050 observations composed of 83,090 emergent and 119,960 elective colectomies. The state with the highest unadjusted proportion of emergent procedures was Nevada (53.6%), whereas Texas had the lowest (22.8%) [corrected]. Compared with the national average, the adjusted odds of undergoing emergency colectomy remained highest in Nevada (OR, 1.70; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-1.87) and lowest in Texas (OR, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.51).

CONCLUSION

Substantial state variations exist in rates of emergency colon surgery within the United States. Identification of these differences suggests significant variations in practice and a potential to decrease the number of emergent colon operations.

Use of the high dependency unit, increased consultant involvement and reduction in adverse events in patients who die after colorectal cancer surgery

AIM

We prospectively audited adverse events for surgical patients with colorectal cancer who died under surgical care to test the hypothesis that increased critical care and consultant input could be associated with a reduction in adverse events.

METHOD

Patients with a diagnosis of colorectal cancer who died under surgical care in Scotland from 1996 to 2005 underwent peer review audit using established methodologies through the Scottish Audit of Surgical Mortality.

RESULTS

In the 10-year study period, 3029 patients with colorectal cancer, mean age 76 (13-105) years, died under surgical care, of whom 80% had presented as an emergency admission. Operative intervention was performed in 1557 (51%) patients of whom 1030 (34%) patients had a resection of the cancer. The annual number of patients dying after a cancer resection decreased significantly (P = 0.009). Significant decreases in adverse events were noted over time with a 67% fall in adverse events relating to critical care (P = 0.009), a 37% fall for surgical care (P = 0.04) and a significant increase in consultant anaesthetist and consultant surgeon input, but there was a 9% increase in delay as an adverse event (P = 0.006). The documented anastomotic leakage rate in patients who died increased from 8% in 1996 to 19% in 2005 (P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

The number of patients dying with colorectal cancer after surgery has decreased in recent years. Adverse events in these patients have significantly reduced over a decade with increased consultant involvement although there is the potential for further improvement.