Impact of emergency surgery in the outcome of rectal and left colon carcinoma

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.

Comparison of short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival between emergency and elective surgery for colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to summarize relevant data from previous reports and perform a meta-analysis to compare short-term surgical outcomes and long-term oncological outcomes between emergency and elective surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using PubMed and Embase databases, and relevant data were extracted. Postoperative morbidity, hospital mortality within 30 days, postoperative recovery, overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS) were compared using a fixed or random-effect model.

RESULTS

A total of 28 studies involving 353,686 participants were enrolled for this systematic review and meta-analysis, and 23.5% (83,054/353,686) of CRC patients underwent emergency surgery. The incidence of emergency presentations in CRC patients ranged from 2.7 to 38.8%. The lymph node yield of emergency surgery was comparable to that of elective surgery (WMD:0.70, 95%CI: - 0.74,2.14, P = 0.340; I² = 80.6%). Emergency surgery had a higher risk of postoperative complications (OR:1.83, 95%CI:1.62-2.07, P < 0.001; I² = 10.6%) and hospital mortality within 30 days (OR:4.62, 95%CI:4.18-5.10, P < 0.001; I² = 42.9%) than elective surgery for CRC. In terms of long-term oncological outcomes, emergency surgery was significantly associated with poorer RFS (HR: 1.51, 95%CI:1.24-1.83, P < 0.001; I² = 58.9%) and OS(HR:1.60, 95%CI: 1.47-1.73, P < 0.001; I² = 63.4%) of CRC patients. In addition, the subgroup analysis for colon cancer patients revealed a pooled HR of 1.73 for OS (95%CI:1.52-1.96, P < 0.001), without the evidence of significant heterogeneity (I² = 21.2%).

CONCLUSION

Emergency surgery for CRC had an adverse impact on short-term surgical outcomes and long-term survival. A focus on early screening programs and health education was warranted to reduce emergency presentations of CRC patients.

Colon cancer patients with mismatch repair deficiency are more likely to present as acute surgical cases

BACKGROUND

The effect of the genetic imprint on the emergency presentation of colon cancer remains unclear. The disparity between tumours evolving along different carcinogenetic pathways has not been studied systematically. This retrospective multicenter cohort study evaluates the association between mismatch repair status and the risk for acute surgery of colon cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective multicenter cohort study including in total 870 patients from three different countries. Scandinavian cohort (Finland and Sweden), including a total of 412 patients operated between January 1, 1995 and December 31, 2010, was validated against a cohort from the Czech Republic, including a total of 458 patients, operated between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2019. The proficiency or deficiency of mismatch repair was determined by immunohistochemistry. Primary outcome was the risk for acute colon cancer surgery given as the Odds Ratio (OR) in the univariable and multivariable analyses. Acute colon cancer surgery was defined as surgery performed during the same hospital admission as when the diagnosis of colon cancer was made.

RESULTS

Of the 870 patients (399 females [46%]) included in the analyses, median age at surgery was 69 [interquartile range, 61-76] years, deficient Mismatch Repair (dMMR) status was found in 190 patients (22%), and 179 patients (21%) underwent acute surgery during the same hospital admission as when the diagnosis of colon cancer was made. In the Scandinavian cohort, a significant association between dMMR status and acute surgery was seen in both the univariable (OR 1.82, 95% CI 1.11-3.02, P = 0.017) and the multivariable (OR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.28-3.95, P = 0.005) analyses. This was confirmed in the Czech validation cohort in both the univariable (OR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.09-3.26, P = 0.022) and the multivariable (OR = 1.77, 95% CI 1.15-3.18, P = 0.021) analyses.

CONCLUSION

This multicenter study reveals a strong association between acute colon cancer surgery and dMMR tumour status.

Cardiac risk stratification in emergency resection for colonic tumours

Background

Despite advances in perioperative care, the postoperative mortality rate after emergency oncological colonic resection remains high. Risk stratification may allow targeted perioperative optimization and cardiac risk stratification. This study aimed to test the hypothesis that the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI), a user-friendly tool, could identify patients who would benefit most from perioperative cardiac risk mitigation.

Methods

Patients who underwent emergency resection for colonic cancer from 2007 to 2017 and registered in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR) were analysed retrospectively. These patients were cross-referenced by social security number to the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare data set, a government registry of mortality, and co-morbidity data. RCRI scores were calculated for each patient and correlated with 90-day postoperative mortality risk, using Poisson regression with robust error of variance.

Results

Some 5703 patients met the study inclusion criteria. A linear increase in crude 90-day postoperative mortality was detected with increasing RCRI score (37.3 versus 11.3 per cent for RCRI 4 or more versus RCRI 1; P < 0.001). The adjusted 90-day all-cause mortality risk was also significantly increased (RCRI 4 or more versus RCRI 1: adjusted incidence rate ratio 2.07, 95 per cent c.i. 1.49 to 2.89; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

This study documented an association between increasing cardiac risk and 90-day postoperative mortality. Those undergoing emergency colorectal surgery for cancer with a raised RCRI score should be considered high-risk patients who would most likely benefit from enhanced postoperative monitoring and critical care expertise.

Adequacy of lymph node harvest following colectomy for obstructed and nonobstructed colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Technical and clinical differences in resection of obstructed and non-obstructed colon cancers may result in differences in lymph node retrieval. The objective of this study is to compare the lymph node harvest following resection of obstructed and nonobstructed colon cancer patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis utilizing the 2014-2018 NSQIP colectomy targeted data set was conducted. One-to-one coarsened exact matching (CEM) was utilized between patients undergoing resection for obstructed and non-obstructed colon cancer. The primary outcome was the adequacy of lymph node retrieval (LNR, ≥12 nodes).

RESULTS

CEM resulted in 9412 patients. Patients with obstructed tumors were more likely to have inadequate LNR (13.3% vs 8.2%, p < .001) compared to those with nonobstructed tumors. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with obstructing tumors had worse LNR compared to non-obstructed tumors (odds ratio [OR]: 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.87; p < .005). Increased age (OR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.098-0.99), presence of preoperative sepsis (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.055-0.90), left-sided and sigmoid tumors compared to right-sided (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.51-0.81; OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.82, respectively), and open surgical resection compared to an minimally invasive surgical approach were associated with inadequate LNR (p < .05).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that resection for obstructing colon cancer compared to non-obstructed colon cancer is associated with increased odds of inadequate lymph node harvest.

Emergency curative resection of colorectal cancer, do it with caution. A comparative case series

Introduction

The feasibility and efficacy of emergency curative resection of complicated colorectal cancer is still controversial. This prospective study aim was to assess surgical and oncologic outcomes after emergency compared to elective curative resection of colorectal cancer.

Methods

60 consecutive patients presented with complicated colorectal cancer managed by emergency surgery were included and compared to another 155 consecutive patients admitted during the same period with uncomplicated colorectal cancer managed by elective surgery. Both groups were compared regarding curative resection rate, early postoperative mortality and morbidity, 3-years tumor recurrence and survival rates.

Results

Complicated colorectal cancer presented at a more advanced stage with a lower resectability rate and higher postoperative mortality and morbidity rates when compared to uncomplicated ones. Emergency resection of stage I/II colorectal cancer had similar 3-years disease free, overall survival and cancer-specific mortality rates approximating elective. But, emergency resection of stage III tumors had significantly decreased 3-years disease free and overall survival rates although there was no significant increase in cancer specific mortality rate.

Conclusions

Complicated colonic cancers present at a more advanced stage with a lower resectability rate, and higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rates when compared with uncomplicated ones. In medically fit patients, emergency curative resection of complicated colorectal cancer could be done safely with survival outcomes approximating elective resection of uncomplicated cancer in the same stage if proper oncologic resection done by expert surgeon.

•

The feasibility and efficacy of emergency curative resection of complicated colorectal cancer is still controversial.

•

Most of previous studies were not well designed and included both curative and palliative resection.

•

This study compared emergency and elective curative resection regarding proper resection, tumor recurrence & survival rate.

•

This study revealed that emergency curative resection has ‎higher postoperative morbidity and mortality rates.

•

Proper emergency resection by expert surgeon has similar survival outcomes to elective resection of cancer in same stage.

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.

Urgent surgery in colon cancer has no impact on survival

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Despite advances in early detection of colon cancer, a minority of patients still require urgent surgery. Whether such urgent conditions result in poor outcome remains a topic of debate.

METHODS

Using a prospectively maintained database, patients suffering exclusively from colon cancer and receiving either elective or emergent resection between 2001 and 2014 were analyzed with respect to overall, disease-specific, and relative survival using Cox regression and propensity score analyses.

RESULTS

From a total of 877 patients analyzed, 2.7% (24) presented with complications requiring urgent surgery. Propensity-scoring identified strongly biased patient characteristics (0.097 ± 0.069 vs 0.028 ± 0.043; P < 0.001). An unadjusted Cox proportional hazards regression analysis revealed urgent surgery as a statistically significant prognostic factor with an approximately 207% increased risk of mortality (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.07; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.62-5.81; P = 0.003). After adjusting the data according to the propensity score analysis, urgent surgery was not associated with a decreased overall (HR = 1.67; 95%CI; 0.84-3.36; P = 0.174), disease-specific (HR = 1.62; 95% CI; 0.81-3.24; P = 0.201) or relative survival (HR = 1.86; 95% CI: 0.92-3.79; P = 0.086).

CONCLUSIONS

After risk-adjustment, using multivariable Cox regression and propensity score analyses, no significant disadvantage could be noted with regard to overall, disease-specific, or relative survival in patients with exclusively colon cancer who received emergent oncological resection.

Outcomes of Elderly Patients Undergoing Emergency Surgery for Complicated Colorectal Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent types of malignant neoplasms. Age is a risk factor for this disease, with 75% of cases diagnosed in patients older than 65 years. Complications such as obstruction, hemorrhage, and perforation are present in more than one-third of cases and require emergency treatment. We aim to analyze the profile of elderly patients undergoing surgery for complicated colorectal cancer, and to evaluate factors related to worse short-term prognosis.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent emergency surgical treatment for complicated colorectal cancer was performed. Demographics, clinical, radiological and histological data were collected.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven patients were analyzed. The median age was 72 years, and almost half (46%) of the patients were female. Obstruction was the most prevalent complication at initial presentation (72%). The most common sites of neoplasia were the left and sigmoid colon in 22 patients (32.8%), and the right colon in 17 patients (25.4%). Resection was performed in 88% of cases, followed by primary anastomosis in almost half. The most frequent clinical stages were II (48%) and III (22%). Forty-three patients (65.7%) had some form of postoperative complication. Clavien-Dindo grades 1, 2, and 4, were the most frequent. Complete oncologic resection was observed in 80% of the cases. The thirty-day mortality rate was 10.4%. Advanced age was associated with worse morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Elderly patients with complicated colorectal cancer undergoing emergency surgery have high morbidity and mortality rates. Advanced age is significantly associated with worse outcomes.

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.

Long-term outcomes of palliative colonic stenting versus emergency surgery for acute proximal malignant colonic obstruction: a multicenter trial

Background and study aims Long-term data are limited regarding clinical outcomes of self-expanding metal stents as an alternative for surgery in the treatment of acute proximal MBO. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of stenting to surgery for palliation in patients with incurable obstructive CRC for lesions proximal to the splenic flexure. Patients and methods Retrospective multicenter cohort study of obstructing proximal CRC patients with who underwent insertion of a SEMS (n = 69) or surgery (n = 36) from 1999 to 2014. The primary endpoint was relief of obstruction. Secondary endpoints included technical success, duration of hospital stay, early and late adverse events (AEs) and survival. Results Technical success was achieved in 62/69 (89.8 %) patients in the SEMS group and in 36 /36 (100 %) patients who underwent surgery (P = 0.09). In the SEMS group, 10 patients underwent stenting as a bridge to surgery and 59 underwent stent placement for palliation. Clinical relief was achieved in 78 % of patients with stenting and in 100 % of patients who underwent surgery (P < 0.001). Patients with SEMS had significantly less acute AEs compared to the surgery group (7.2 % vs. 30.5 %, P = 0.003). Hospital mortality for the SEMS group was 0 % compared to 5.6 % in the surgery group (P = 0.11). Patients in the SEMS group had a significantly shorter median hospital stay (4 days) as compared to the surgery group (8 days) (P < 0.01). Maintenance of decompression without the recurrence of bowel obstruction until death or last follow-up was lower in the SEMS group (73.9 %) than the surgery group (97.3 %; P = 0.003). SEMS placement was associated with higher long-term complication rates compared to surgery (21 % and 11 % P = 0.27). Late SEMS AEs included occlusion (10 %), migration (5 %), and colonic ulcer (6 %). At 120 weeks, survival in the SEMS group was 5.6 % vs. 0 % in the surgery group (P = 0.8). Conclusions Technical and clinical success associated with proximal colonic obstruction are higher with surgery when compared to SEMS, but surgery is associated with longer hospital stays and more early AEs. SEMS should be considered the initial mode of therapy in patients with acute proximal MBO and surgery should be reserved for SEMS failure, as surgery involves a high morbidity and mortality.

Factors associated with mode of colorectal cancer detection and time to diagnosis: a population level study

Background

Although it is well-known that early detection of colorectal cancer (CRC) is important for optimal patient survival, the relationship of patient and health system factors with delayed diagnosis are unclear. The purpose of this study was to identify the demographic, clinical and healthcare factors related to mode of CRC detection and length of the diagnostic interval.

Methods

All residents of Alberta, Canada diagnosed with first-ever incident CRC in years 2004–2010 were identified from the Alberta Cancer Registry. Population-based administrative health datasets, including hospital discharge abstract, ambulatory care classification system and physician billing data, were used to identify healthcare services related to CRC diagnosis. The time to diagnosis was defined as the time from the first CRC-related healthcare visit to the date of CRC diagnosis. Mode of CRC detection was classified into three groups: urgent, screen-detected and symptomatic. Quantile regression was performed to assess factors associated with time to diagnosis.

Results

9626 patients were included in the study; 25% of patients presented as urgent, 32% were screen-detected and 43% were symptomatic. The median time to diagnosis for urgent, screen-detected and symptomatic patients were 6 days (interquartile range (IQR) 2–14 days), 74 days (IQR 36–183 days), 84 days (IQR 39–223 days), respectively. Time to diagnosis was greater than 6 months for 27% of non-urgent patients. Healthcare factors had the largest impact on time to diagnosis: 3 or more visits to a GP increased the median by 140 days whereas 2 or more visits to a GI-specialist increased it by 108 days compared to 0–1 visits to a GP or GI-specialist, respectively.

Conclusion

A large proportion of CRC patients required urgent work-up or had to wait more than 6 months for diagnosis. Actions are needed to reduce the frequency of urgent presentation as well as improve the timeliness of diagnosis. Findings suggest a need to improve coordination of care across multiple providers.

Evaluation of the patients with colorectal cancer undergoing emergent curative surgery

Background

The aim of our study is to evaluate perioperative and mid-term oncologic outcomes of the patients with colorectal cancer, who underwent emergent curative surgery.

Methods

The study included all patients with colorectal cancer, who underwent surgery for curative intent between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2014 in General Surgery Department of Kartal Training and Research Hospital. The patients were divided into two groups according to the type of admission (emergent or elective). The data of the patients were retrospectively collected with chart review. Demographic characteristics of the patients, ASA scores, emergent indications and surgical interventions, postoperative complications, pathological findings, oncological therapy, and follow-up findings were investigated.

Results

Fifty-one and 209 patients were evaluated in both groups, respectively. Rate of right sided and sigmoid/recto-sigmoid tumors were significantly higher in emergent group. Ostomy rate, early morbidity, ICU need, transfusion, and mortality rates in emergent group were significantly higher than elective group. Average length of hospital stay in emergent group was also significantly longer in elective group (11.2 ± 3.2 vs. 8.4 ± 2.4 days). The patients in emergent group had a much lower survival rate than those in elective group.

Conclusion

In our study, emergency presentation of colorectal cancer was found associated with increased morbidity, a longer length of stay, increased in-hospital mortality, advanced pathologic stage and worsened long term survival in even same stages.

Causes and outcomes of emergency presentation of rectal cancer

Emergency presentation of rectal cancer carries a relatively poor prognosis, but the roles and interactions of causative factors remain unclear. We describe an innovative statistical approach which distinguishes between direct and indirect effects of a number of contextual, patient and tumour factors on emergency presentation and outcome of rectal cancer. All patients diagnosed with rectal cancer in Ireland 2004-2008 were included. Registry information, linked to hospital discharge data, provided data on patient demographics, comorbidity and health insurance; population density and deprivation of area of residence; tumour type, site, grade and stage; treatment type and optimality; and emergency presentation and hospital caseload. Data were modelled using a structural equation model with a discrete-time survival outcome, allowing us to estimate direct and mediated effects of the above factors on hazard, and their inter-relationships. Two thousand seven hundred and fifty patients were included in the analysis. Around 12% had emergency presentations, which increased hazard by 80%. Affluence, private patient status and being married reduced hazard indirectly by reducing emergency presentation. Older patients had more emergency presentations, while married patients, private patients or those living in less deprived areas had fewer than expected. Patients presenting as an emergency were less likely to receive optimal treatment or to have this in a high caseload hospital. Apart from stage, emergency admission was the strongest determinant of poor survival. The factors contributing to emergency admission in this study are similar to those associated with diagnostic delay. The socio-economic gradient found suggests that patient education and earlier access to endoscopic investigation for public patients could reduce emergency presentation.

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.

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.

Incremental Cost of Emergency Versus Elective Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To determine hospital costs and the adjusted risk of death associated with emergent versus elective surgery.

BACKGROUND

Emergency surgery has a higher cost and worse outcomes compared with elective surgery. However, no national estimates of the excess burden of emergency surgery exist.

METHODS

Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) data from 2001 to 2010 were analyzed. Patients aged 18 years or older who underwent abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass graft, or colon resection for neoplasm were included. Using generalized linear models with propensity scores, cost differences for emergent versus elective admission were calculated for each procedure. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate the adjusted odds of mortality comparing elective and emergent cases. Discharge-level weights were applied to analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 621,925 patients, representing a weighted population of 3,057,443, were included. The adjusted mean cost difference for emergent versus elective care was $8741.22 (30% increase) for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, $5309.78 (17% increase) for coronary artery bypass graft, and $7813.53 (53% increase) for colon resection. If 10% of the weighted estimates of emergency procedures had been performed electively, the cost benefit would have been nearly $1 billion, at $996,169,160 (95% confidence interval [CI], $985,505,565-$1,006,834,104). Elective surgery patients had significantly lower adjusted odds of mortality for all procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Even a modest reduction in the proportion of emergent procedures for 3 conditions is estimated to save nearly $1 billion over 10 years. Preventing emergency surgery through improved care coordination and screening offers a tremendous opportunity to save lives and decrease costs.

Time to readiness for discharge is a valid and reliable measure of short-term recovery after colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

Short-term recovery after colorectal surgery has been traditionally investigated through length of stay (LOS). However, this measure is influenced by several confounding factors. This study aimed to investigate the construct validity and reliability of assessing the time to achieve standardized discharge criteria (time to readiness for discharge, or TRD) as a measure of short-term recovery. In a secondary analysis, we compared sample size requirements for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using TRD or LOS as outcome measures.

METHODS

Seventy patients participated in the construct validity study and 21 patients participated in the reliability study. TRD was defined as the number of days to achieve discharge criteria previously defined by consensus. Construct validity was investigated by testing six hypothesis based on the assumption that TRD measures short-term recovery. Reliability was calculated by comparing measures of TRD by two independent assessors. Variability estimates (standard deviations) of LOS and TRD were used for sample size calculations.

RESULTS

Five of the six hypotheses were supported by the data (p < 0.05). Interobserver reliability was excellent (ICC2.1 = 0.99). Sample size estimations showed that RCTs using TRD as an outcome measure require approximately 23 % less participants compared to RCTs using LOS.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this research support the construct-validity and reliability of TRD as a measure of short-term recovery. Using TRD as an alternative to LOS may reduce sample size requirements in future RCTs.

Major postoperative complications following elective resection for colorectal cancer decrease long-term survival but not the time to recurrence

AIM

The aim of the study was to determine the effect of major complications after colorectal cancer surgery on survival and time to recurrence.

METHOD

Patients having a curative colorectal cancer resection and a follow-up of at least 3 years were identified from a prospective database. Major complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo Grades 3b or 4 and their impact on time to recurrence and mortality was analysed by univariate and multivariable analysis. Postoperative death within 30 days or during the initial hospitalization (Clavien-Dindo Grade 5) was a priori excluded.

RESULTS

From 2003 to 2012, 868 colorectal cancer resections resulting in 63 (7%) major postoperative complications including deaths (Clavien-Dindo ≥ 3b) were identified. After exclusion of Grade 5 complications (postoperative or in-hospital deaths), 844 resections with 39 (5%) major complications remained for analysis. Median follow-up time was 5.7 years. Using the Kaplan-Meier method, the estimated crude 5-year overall survival probability was 78% (95% CI 75-81) in the group without and 65% (95% CI 51-83) in the group with major complications (P = 0.009, log-rank test). Major complications were a significant negative predictor for overall survival (hazard ratio 2.42, 95% CI 1.41-4.14) when adjusted for sex, age, American Society of Anesthesiologists grade, tumour site (colon vs rectum), R stage and tumour stage. However, in both univariate and multivariable analysis, major complications were not a significant predictor for time to recurrence (hazard ratio 1.29, 95% CI 0.56-2.99).

CONCLUSION

Non-lethal major postoperative complications seem to have a negative long-term impact on survival but not on time to recurrence.

Colon cancer surgery following emergency presentation: effects on admission and stage-adjusted outcomes

BACKGROUND

Emergency presentation with colon cancer is intuitively related to advanced disease. We measured its effect on outcomes of surgically treated colon cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of 1,071 surgical colon cancer patients (2004 to 2011), with 102 emergency cases requiring surgery within the index admission, was analyzed.

RESULTS

Emergency patients required longer surgeries (median 141 vs 124 minutes; P = .04), longer median admissions (8% vs 5%; P < .001), more readmissions (12.7% vs 7.1%; P = .040), and perioperative mortality (7.8% vs .8%; P < .001). Surgical pathology displayed higher rates of node-positive disease (56.6% vs 38.6%; P < .001), extramural vascular invasion (39.6% vs 29.1%; P = .021), and metastatic disease (19.6% vs 8%; P < .001). Consequently, adjusting for staging, emergency presentations had considerably higher mortality (odds ratio = 2.07; P = .003) and shorter disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.39; P = .042).

CONCLUSIONS

Emergency presentation is a stage-independent poor prognostic factor associated with aggressive tumor biology, resulting in longer surgeries and admissions, frequent readmissions, worsening outcomes, and increasing healthcare costs.

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.

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.

Analysis of 230 cases of emergent surgery for obstructing colon cancer--lessons learned

PURPOSE

We aimed to identify prognostic factors affecting clinical outcomes in emergent primary resection.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data of 230 consecutive emergent patients between August 1994 and January 2005 were evaluated in this study. Sixty-nine patients applied with right colon obstruction and 161 patients with left. Resection and primary anastomosis was carried out in 128 patients and resection and stoma in 102 patients. The patients were divided into two cohorts: patients who developed poor outcome within 30 days after surgery and those who did not.

RESULTS

Major morbidity or mortality were reported in 60 (26.1%) patients. Analysis revealed that the most important prognostic factors for poor outcome were American Anesthesiology Association (ASA) grade ≥3, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score ≥11, age >60 years, presence of peritonitis, and surgery during on-call hours. Age >60 years and on-call surgery were determinant factors in right-sided obstructions, whereas ASA grade ≥3, APACHE II score ≥11, and presence of peritonitis were determinant factors in left-sided obstructions.

CONCLUSIONS

All these factors but the timing of the operation emphasize the pivotal role of the patient's physiological condition on admission. Accurate preoperative evaluation might predict the clinical outcome and help in establishing the most appropriate treatment.

A comparison of palliative stenting or emergent surgery for obstructing incurable colon cancer

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic obstruction because of advanced colonic malignancy is a surgical emergency. Our aim was to review our experience with self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) compared to emergent surgery as the initial therapy for the management of patients with incurable obstructing colon cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients with obstructing colon cancer who underwent insertion of a SEMS (n = 53) or surgery (n = 70) from 2002 to 2008 was performed. The primary endpoint was relief of obstruction. Secondary endpoints include technical success of the procedure, duration of hospital stay, early and long-term complications, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Both groups were similar in age, sex, and tumor distribution. Placement of SEMS was successful in 50/53 (94%) patients. Surgery was effective in relieving obstruction in 70/70 (100%) patients. Patients in the SEMS group have a significantly shorter median hospital stay (2 days) as compared to the surgery group (8 days) (P < 0.001). Patients with SEMS also had significantly less acute complications compared to the surgery group (8 vs. 30%, P = 0.03). The hospital mortality for the SEMS group was 0% compared to 8.5% in patients that underwent surgical decompression (P = 0.04). There was no difference in survival between the two groups (P = 0.76).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with colorectal cancer and obstructive symptoms, SEMS provide a highly effective and safe therapy when compared to surgery. In most patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and obstruction, SEMS provide a minimally invasive alternative to surgical intervention.

Systemic cytokine response after emergency and elective surgery for colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Systemic cytokines (SC) are accepted mediators of host immune response. It is debated if long-term survival is influenced by emergency presentation of colorectal cancer, and the role of immunitary response is still unknown. The aim of this prospective study was to compare the SC response after emergency resection with that after elective resections of colorectal carcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred six consecutive subjects with colorectal cancer were submitted to emergency (complete bowel obstruction; EMS, n = 50) or elective resection (ELS, n = 56) of the tumour. Sera were collected before surgery and at appropriate time points afterward and assayed for interleukin-1beta (IL-1beta), tumour necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP). Five-year survival was analysed according to Kaplan-Meier test. The Cox proportional hazard model was used for the multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

Pre-operative levels of IL-1beta, IL-6 and CRP were statistically higher in the EMS group. Levels of TNF-alpha were not elevated after surgery and there was no difference between the groups. Five-year survival was significantly lower in the EMS group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Immunitary response, as reflected by SC, was better after elective resection than after emergency resection of colorectal carcinoma and this difference may have implication in the long-term survival.

Emergency first presentation of colorectal cancer predicts significantly poorer outcomes: a review of 356 consecutive Irish patients

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer commonly presents first as an emergency and is likely to be complicated by bowel obstruction/perforation requiring more difficult procedures, with poorer outcomes. Analysis of all of the procedures performed on patients diagnosed in Wexford General Hospital, Ireland, during the period 2000 to 2006 was carried out to validate this hypothesis in our western European population.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database of patient demographics, diagnosis, procedures, and mode of presentation (elective, emergency) was undertaken.

RESULTS

A total of 356 patients with colorectal cancer underwent 498 procedures during the years 2000 to 2006. Eighty-four emergency endoscopies and 100 emergency bowel resections were performed. Obstructive lesions were more likely to require emergency resection (P < 0.001). Median survival time for patients treated electively was 82 months vs. 59 months for patients treated on an emergency basis.

CONCLUSIONS

Of all colonic resections, 34 percent were carried out as emergencies and were significantly more likely to be complicated by obstruction or perforation (P < 0.001). Emergency resections were associated with a significantly poorer perioperative mortality and five-year survival rate (P < 0.001). Forty-one percent of colorectal cancers diagnosed at endoscopy were first seen emergently. These data raise concerns regarding public awareness of colorectal cancer and resource allocation and reemphasize the need for a national colorectal screening program.

Risk factors for mortality-morbidity after emergency-urgent colorectal surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the risk factors associated with mortality and morbidity following emergency or urgent colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All data regarding the 462 patients who underwent emergency colonic resection in our institution between November 2002 and December 2007 were prospectively entered into a computerized database.

RESULTS

The median age of patients was 73 (range 17-98) years. The most common indications for surgery were: 171 adenocarcinomas (37%), 129 complicated diverticulitis (28%), and 35 colonic ischemia (7.5%). Overall mortality and morbidity rates were 14% and 36%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the only parameter significantly associated with postoperative mortality was blood loss >500 cm(3) (odds ratio (OR) = 3.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.63-6.82, p = 0.001). There were three parameters which correlated with postoperative morbidity: ASA score > or =3 (OR = 2.9, 95% CI 1.9-4.5, p < 0.001), colonic ischemia (OR = 3.4, 95% CI 1.4-7.7, p = 0.006), and stoma creation (OR = 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.4, p = 0.0003).

CONCLUSIONS

The main risk factors for postoperative morbidity and mortality following emergency colorectal surgery are related to: (1) patients' ASA score, (2) colonic ischemia, and (3) perioperative bleeding. These variables should be considered in the elaboration of future scoring systems to predict outcome of emergency colorectal surgery.

Results of emergency Hartmann's operation for obstructive or perforated left-sided colorectal cancer

Background

Up to 15% of colorectal cancer (CRC) patients present with obstructive or perforated tumours, and require emergency surgery. The Hartmann's procedure (HP) provides the opportunity to achieve a potentially curative (R0) resection, while minimizing surgical trauma in poor-risk patients. The aim of this study was to assess the surgical (operative mortality), and oncological (long-term survival after curative resection) results of emergency HP for obstructive or perforated left-sided CRC.

Methods

A retrospective review of 50 patients who underwent emergency HP for perforated/obstructive CRC in our institution between 1995 and 2006.

Results

Median age of patients was 75 (range 22–95) years and the indications for HP were obstruction (32) and perforation (18 patients). Operative mortality and morbidity were 8% and 26% respectively. 35 patients (70%) were operated with a curative intent; in this group, overall 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates were 80%, 54% and 40%. In univariate analysis, the presence of lymph node metastases was associated with poor 5-year survival (62% [Stage II] vs. 27% [Stage III], log-rank test, p = 0.02). Eleven patients (22%) had their operation reversed with a median delay of 225 (range 94–390) days. In this subgroup, two patients died from distant metastases, but there were no instances of loco-regional recurrence.

Conclusion

Hartmann's operation remains a good option to palliate symptoms in 30% of patients with left-sided CRC who are not candidates to a curative resection. For those who have a curative resection, the oncological outcome is acceptable, especially stage II patients, who appear to benefit the most from this surgical strategy.

Colonic stent versus surgery for the management of acute malignant colonic obstruction: a decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute colonic obstruction because of advanced colonic malignancy is a surgical emergency.

AIM

To compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) vs. surgery for emergent management of acute malignant colonic obstruction in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer over a 6-month period.

METHODS

Decision analysis was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness and success of two competing strategies in a hypothetical patient with metastatic colon cancer presenting with acute, malignant colonic obstruction: (i) emergent colonic stent (SEMS cohort); (ii) emergent surgical resection followed by diversion (surgery cohort).

RESULTS

Self-expanding metal stent resulted in a success and a lower mortality rate when compared to surgery over a 6-month period. Colonic SEMS was also associated with a lower mean cost per patient (USD 27,225 vs. USD 57,398). Mortality in the surgery group was 25 times that of the SEMS cohort. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses identified SEMS as the dominant strategy.

CONCLUSION

Colonic stent insertion is more effective and less costly than surgery for the management of colonic obstruction in patients with metastatic colon cancer.

Management of complications in surgery of the colon

BACKGROUND

General surgeons are frequently confronted with colorectal diseases in their daily practice, whereby colorectal cancer is the second most common malignant tumour, with almost 5000 new cases every year in Austria. The incidence of benign colon disorders requiring surgery (e.g. colon polyps, sigmoid diverticulitis) is also increasing. The first aim in colon surgery should be to avoid complications and if they occur to treat them properly.

METHODS

We basically distinguish between general and special complications. As general complications, prevention of malnutrition and support of the immune system should receive special attention. As the number of elderly patients increases, so does the risk not only of thrombembolic complications but also of critical cardiocirculatory situations, and renal and hepatic failure. Special complications depend either on the type of surgery (laparoscopic assisted, conventional open surgery) or the techniques employed (stapled, hand sutured). Handling of the tissue also plays a major role (e.g. dry versus wet pads).

RESULTS

Shortening of the postoperative stay decreases both hospital costs and the incidence of infections, meaning that minimally invasive surgery and postoperative "fast track nutrition" should be promoted. Emergency operations should be avoided (e.g. bridging through colonic stents), as morbidity and mortality are clearly increased in comparison to (semi-) elective operations. During the operation itself, new equipment and techniques (such as Ultracision®, Ligasure®) as well as a well coordinated team help to reduce complications and duration of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

To avoid is better than to repair. If complications do occur, appropriate surgical and intensive - care measures should be taken immediately.