Nationwide implementation of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer: short-term outcomes and long-term survival in a population-based cohort

Have the recent advancements in cancer therapy and survival benefitted patients of all age groups across the Nordic countries? NORDCAN survival analyses 2002-2021

BACKGROUND

Since the early 2000s, overall and site-specific cancer survival have improved substantially in the Nordic countries. We evaluated whether the improvements have been similar across countries, major cancer types, and age groups.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Using population-based data from the five Nordic cancer registries recorded in the NORDCAN database, we included a cohort of 1,525,854 men and 1,378,470 women diagnosed with cancer (except non-melanoma skin cancer) during 2002-2021, and followed for death until 2021. We estimated 5-year relative survival (RS) in 5-year calendar periods, and percentage points (pp) differences in 5-year RS from 2002-2006 until 2017-2021. Separate analyses were performed for eight cancer sites (i.e. colorectum, pancreas, lung, breast, cervix uteri, kidney, prostate, and melanoma of skin).

RESULTS

Five-year RS improved across nearly all cancer sites in all countries (except Iceland), with absolute differences across age groups ranging from 1 to 21 pp (all cancer sites), 2 to 20 pp (colorectum), -1 to 36 pp (pancreas), 2 to 28 pp (lung), 0 to 9 pp (breast), -11 to 26 pp (cervix uteri), 2 to 44 pp (kidney), -2 to 23 pp (prostate) and -3 to 30 pp (skin melanoma). The oldest patients (80-89 years) exhibited lower survival across all countries and sites, although with varying improvements over time.

INTERPRETATION

Nordic cancer patients have generally experienced substantial improvements in cancer survival during the last two decades, including major cancer sites and age groups. Although survival has improved over time, older patients remain at a lower cancer survival compared to younger patients.

Surveillance of surgical site infection after colorectal surgery: comprehensiveness and impact of risk factors

OBJECTIVE

The incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) is highest after colorectal surgery. We assessed the impact of risk factors for SSI using the population attributable fraction (PAF).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Portuguese hospitals performing regular surveillance.

PATIENTS

We identified patients who underwent colorectal procedures in hospitals that reported colorectal surgeries every year between 2015 and 2019. Among 42 reporting hospitals, 18 hospitals were included.

METHODS

Risk-factor incidence was estimated using the National Epidemiological Surveillance platform from 2015 to 2019. This platform follows the methodology recommended by the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) physical classification, wound classification, open surgery, urgent operation, antibiotic prophylaxis, operation time, and male sex were included as risk factors. Measures of association were retrieved from published meta-analyses. PAFs were calculated using the Levin formula. To account for interaction between risk factors, communality of risk factors was used in a weighted-sum approach, providing a combined value that serves as a measure of the comprehensiveness of surveillance.

RESULTS

Among 11,219 reported procedures, the cumulative SSI incidence was 16.8%. The proportion of SSI attributed to all risk factors was 61%. Modifiable variables accounted for 31% of procedures; the highest was laparotomy (16.8%), and urgent operations (2.7%) had the lowest value. Nonmodifiable factors accounted for 28.7%; the highest was wound classification (14.3%).

CONCLUSIONS

A relevant proportion (39%) of SSI remains unaccounted for by current surveillance. Almost one-third of SSI cases have potentially modifiable factors. Interventions focusing on shorter, less invasive procedures may be optimally effective in reducing the SSI incidence.

Short- and Long-term Outcomes After Laparoscopic Emergency Resection of Left-Sided Obstructive Colon Cancer: A Nationwide Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The role of laparoscopy for emergency resection of left-sided obstructive colon cancer remains unclear, especially regarding impact on survival.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine short- and long-term outcomes after laparoscopic versus open emergency resection of left-sided obstructive colon cancer.

DESIGN

This observational cohort study compared patients who underwent laparoscopic emergency resection to those who underwent open emergency resection between 2009 and 2016 by using 1:3 propensity-score matching. Matching variables included sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous abdominal surgery, tumor location, cT4, cM1, multivisceral resection, small-bowel distention on CT, and subtotal colectomy.

SETTING

This was a nationwide, population-based study.

PATIENTS

Of 2002 eligible patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer, 158 patients who underwent laparoscopic emergency resection were matched with 474 patients who underwent open emergency resection.

INTERVENTIONS

The intervention was laparoscopic versus open emergency resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measures were 90-day mortality, 90-day complications, permanent stoma, disease recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival.

RESULTS

Intentional laparoscopy resulted in significantly fewer 90-day complications (26.6% vs 38.4%; conditional OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39-0.87) and similar 90-day mortality. Laparoscopy resulted in better 3-year overall survival (81.0% vs 69.4%; HR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.37-0.79) and disease-free survival (68.3% vs 52.3%; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47-0.87). Multivariable regression analyses of the unmatched 2002 patients confirmed an independent association of laparoscopy with fewer 90-day complications and better 3-year survival.

LIMITATIONS

Selection bias was the limitation that cannot be completely ruled out because of the retrospective nature of this study.

CONCLUSIONS

This population-based study with propensity score-matched analysis suggests that intentional laparoscopic emergency resection might improve outcomes in patients with left-sided obstructive colon cancer compared to open emergency resection. Management of those patients in the emergency setting requires proper selection for intentional laparoscopic resection if relevant expertise is available, thereby considering other alternatives to avoid open emergency resection (ie, decompressing stoma). See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B972 .

RESULTADOS A CORTO Y LARGO PLAZO DESPUS DE LA RESECCIN LAPAROSCPICA DE EMERGENCIA EN CNCER DE COLON IZQUIERDO OBSTRUCTIVO UN ANLISIS EMPAREJADO POR PUNTAJE DE PROPENSIN A NIVEL NACIONAL

ANTECEDENTES:El papel de la laparoscopia en la resección de emergencia en cáncer de colon izquierdo obstructivo sigue sin estar claro, especialmente con respecto al impacto en la supervivencia.OBJETIVO:El objetivo de este estudio fue determinar los resultados a corto y largo plazo después de la resección de emergencia laparoscópica versus abierta en cáncer de colon izquierdo obstructivo.DISEÑO:Estudio observacional de cohortes comparó pacientes que se sometieron a resección de laparoscópica de emergencia versus resección abierta de emergencia entre 2009 y 2016, mediante el uso de emparejamineto por puntaje de propensión 1: 3. Las variables emparejadas incluyeron sexo, edad, IMC, puntaje ASA, cirugía abdominal previa, ubicación del tumor, cT4, cM1, resección multivisceral, distensión del intestino delgado en la TAC y colectomía subtotal.ENTORNO CLINICO:A nivel nacional, basado en la población.PACIENTES:De 2002 pacientes elegibles con cáncer de colon izquierdo obstructivo, 158 pacientes con resección laparoscópica s de emergencia e emparejaron con 474 pacientes con resección abierta de emergencia.INTERVENCIONES:Resección laparoscópica de emergencia versus abierta.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Las medidas primarias fueron la mortalidad a 90 días, complicaciones a 90 días, estoma permanente, recurrencia de la enfermedad, supervivencia general y supervivencia libre de enfermedad.RESULTADOS:La laparoscopia intencional dió como resultado significativamente menos complicaciones a los 90 días (26,6 % vs 38,4 %, cOR 0,59, IC del 95 %: 0,39-0,87) y una mortalidad similar a los 90 días. La laparoscopia resultó en una mejor supervivencia general a los 3 años (81,0 % vs 69,4 %, HR 0,54, IC del 95 % 0,37-0,79) y supervivencia libre de enfermedad (68,3 % vs 52,3 %, HR 0,64, IC del 95 % 0,47-0,87). Los análisis de regresión multivariable de los 2002 pacientes no emparejados confirmaron una asociación independiente de la laparoscopia con menos complicaciones a los 90 días y una mejor supervivencia a los 3 años.LIMITACIONES:El sesgo de selección no se puede descartar por completo debido a la naturaleza retrospectiva de este estudio.CONCLUSIONES:Estudio poblacional con análisis emparejado por puntaje de propensión sugiere que la resección laparoscópica de emergencia intencional podría mejorar los resultados a corto y largo plazo en pacientes con cáncer de colon izquierdo obstructivo en comparación con resección abierta de emergencia, lo que justifica la confirmación en estudios futuros. El manejo de esos pacientes en el entorno de emergencia requiere una selección adecuada para la resección laparoscópica intencional si se dispone de experiencia relevante, considerando así otras alternativas para evitar la resección abierta de emergencia (es decir, ostomia descompresiva). Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B972 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon & Dr. Fidel Ruiz Healy).

Short term results in a population based study indicate advantage for laparoscopic colon cancer surgery versus open

The aim of this study was to compare LAP with OPEN regarding short-term mortality, morbidity and completeness of the cancer resection for colon cancer in a routine health care setting using population based register data. All 13,683 patients who were diagnosed 2012-2018 and underwent elective surgery for right-sided or sigmoid colon cancer were included from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry and the National Patient Registry. Primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, length of hospital stay, reoperation, readmission and positive resection margin (R1). Weighted and unweighted multi regression analyses were performed. There were no difference in 30-day mortality: LAP (0.9%) and OPEN (1.3%) (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.62-1.29, P = 0.545). The weighted analyses showed an increased 90-day mortality following OPEN, P < 0.001. Re-operations and re-admission were more frequent after OPEN and length of hospital stay was 2.9 days shorter following LAP (P < 0.001). R1 resections were significantly more common in the OPEN group in the unweighted and weighted analysis with P = 0.004 and P < 0.001 respectively. Therefore, the favourable short-term outcomes following elective LAP versus OPEN resection for colon cancer in routine health care indicate an advantage of laparoscopic surgery.

Long-term oncological outcomes for minimally invasive surgery versus open surgery for colon cancer-a population-based nationwide study with a non-inferiority design

AIM

The study aimed to compare 5-year overall survival in a national cohort of patients undergoing curative abdominal resection for colon cancer by minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or by the open (OPEN) technique.

METHODS

All patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2016 in Sweden with pathological Union International Contre le Cancer Stages I-III colon cancer localized in the caecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure or sigmoid colon and those who underwent curative right sided hemicolectomy, sigmoid resection or high anterior resection by MIS or OPEN were included. Patients were identified in the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry from which all data were retrieved. The analyses were performed as intention-to-treat and the relationship between surgical technique (MIS or OPEN) and overall mortality within 5 years was analysed. For the primary research question a non-inferiority hypothesis was assumed with a statistical power of 90%, a one-side type I error of 2.5% and a non-inferiority margin of 2%. For the secondary analyses, multilevel survival regression models with the patients matched by propensity scores were employed, adjusted for patient- and tumour-related variables.

RESULTS

A total of 11 605 pathological Union International Contre le Cancer Stages I-III patients were included with 3297 MIS (28.4%) and 8308 OPEN (71.6%) and were followed until 31 December 2020. The primary analysis demonstrated superiority for MIS compared to OPEN. The multilevel survival regression analyses confirmed that 5-year overall survival was higher in MIS with a hazard ratio of 0.874 (95% confidence interval 0.791-0.965), and if excluding pT4 the outcome was similar, with a hazard ratio of 0.847 (95% confidence interval 0.756-0.948).

CONCLUSION

This observational study demonstrated that MIS was favourable to OPEN with regard to 5-year overall survival. These results support the use of laparoscopic colon cancer surgery in routine practice.

Survival in Colon, Rectal and Small Intestinal Cancers in the Nordic Countries through a Half Century

Background: Survival studies in intestinal cancers have generally shown favorable development, but few studies have been able to pinpoint the timing of the changes in survival over an extended period. Here, we compared the relative survival rates for colon, rectal and small intestinal cancers from Denmark (DK), Finland (FI), Norway (NO) and Sweden (SE). Design: Relative 1-, 5- and 5/1-year conditional survival data were obtained from the NORDCAN database for the years 1971-2020. Results: The 50-year survival patterns were country-specific. For colon and rectal cancers, the slopes of survival curves bended upwards for DK, were almost linear for NO and bended downwards for FI and SE; 5-year survival was the highest in DK. Survival in small intestinal cancer was initially below colon and rectal cancers but in FI and NO it caught up toward the end of the follow-up. Conclusions: Relative survival in intestinal cancers has developed well in the Nordic countries, and DK is an example of a country which in 20 years was able to achieve excellent survival rates in colon and rectal cancers. In the other countries, the increase in survival curves for colon and rectal cancer has slowed down, which may be a challenge posed by metastatic cancers.

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in an elderly population with high comorbidity: a single centre experience

PURPOSE

The use of laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer in elderly patients with high comorbidity is a controversial subject. This retrospective analysis aims to compare two different age groups with respect to short and long term clinical and oncological outcomes.

METHODS

All laparoscopic colorectal resections for cancer performed between February 2011 and October 2017 with curative or palliative intention were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among 128 completed resections, the rate of major complications, length of hospital stays, 30-day mortality, 2-year recurrence rate, and the survival after palliative surgery were comparable between group A (< 75 years; n = 76) and B (≥ 75 years; n = 52). Patients in group B showed an extraordinarily high proportion of ASA III stage (73.1% vs. A: 35.5%; p < 0.01) and, in this context, an increased rate of minor postoperative complications (17.3% vs. A: 6.6%; p < 0.05) and lower overall 2 and 5-year survival rates. Within the first 2 years, they died sooner in the event of recurrence (57.1% vs. A: 18.2%; p < 0.05), and their survival after rectal resection, especially for low rectal carcinoma, was significantly reduced (58.8% vs. A: 96.7%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer can be strongly advocated for elderly patients even in the face of high comorbidity. Whether very old patients with low rectal carcinoma also benefit from minimally invasive surgery or should undergo alternative therapies would need to be clarified primarily by examining the quality of life.

Survival trends in patients diagnosed with colon and rectal cancer in the nordic countries 1990-2016: The NORDCAN survival studies

BACKGROUND

Survival of patients with colon and rectal cancer has improved in all Nordic countries during the past decades. The aim of this study was to further assess survival trends in patients with colon and rectal cancer in the Nordic countries by age at diagnosis and to present additional survival measures.

METHODS

Data on colon and rectal cancer cases diagnosed in the Nordic countries between 1990 and 2016 were obtained from the NORDCAN database. Relative survival was estimated using flexible parametric models. Both age-standardized and age-specific measures for women and men were estimated from the models, as well as reference-adjusted crude probabilities of death and life-years lost.

RESULTS

The five-year age-standardized relative survival of colon and rectal cancer patients continued to improve for women and men in all Nordic countries, from around 50% in 1990 to about 70% at the end of the study period. In general, survival was similar across age and sex. The largest improvement was seen for Danish men and women with rectal cancer, from 41% to 69% and from 43% to 71%, respectively. The age-standardized and reference-adjusted five-year crude probability of death in colon cancer ranged from 30% to 36% across countries, and for rectal cancer from 20% to 33%. The average number of age-standardized and reference-adjusted life-years lost ranged between six and nine years.

CONCLUSION

There were substantial improvements in colon and rectal cancer survival in all Nordic countries 1990-2016. Of special note is that the previously observed survival disadvantage in Denmark is no longer present.

Development and Internal Validation of a Nomogram-Based Model to Predict Three-Year and Five-Year Overall Survival in Patients with Stage II/III Colon Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop a nomogram-based model to predict the three-year and five-year overall survival (OS) of patients with stage II/III colon cancer following radical resection.

METHODS

A total of 1156 patients with stage II/III colon cancer who underwent radical resection at the Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University between December 2012 and December 2018 were enrolled. Lasso regression was used to screen out 12 variables: age, prealbumin, albumin, degree of differentiation, total tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) stage, T stage, N stage, prognostic nutritional index (PNI), platelet/lymphocyte count, carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9), and postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy. The data set was then randomly split into a modeling set and a validation set, and the bootstrap method was used to verify the internal validity of the final model. A nomogram was then used to present the model, and the risk groups were categorized according to the total score in the nomogram.

RESULTS

This study established and developed a simple, easy-to-use predictive model that included age, degree of differentiation, N stage, CA19-9, PNI, and postoperative chemotherapy as variables. In the multivariate Cox regression analysis, only postoperative chemotherapy was identified as an independent risk factor for death in patients with colon cancer. The receiver operating characteristic curve showed that the model demonstrated good resolution, with an area under the curve of 0.803. Decision curve analysis indicated that the model had a good positive net gain, and the bootstrap method was used to verify its stability. In the OS rate, the C-index was 0.78. According to the total score of the nomogram, the risk group was layered by drawing the Kaplan-Meier (K-M) curve. In the three-year OS K-M curve, the survival rates of the low-risk group, the medium-risk group, and the high-risk group were 96%, 93%, and 82%, respectively. In the five-year OS K-M curve, the survival rates of the low-risk group, the medium-risk group, and the high-risk group were 94%, 90%, and 73%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The nomogram-based prediction model developed in this study is stable and has good resolution, reliability, and net gain. It will therefore be useful for clinicians performing risk stratification and postoperative monitoring and in the development of personalized treatment options for patients with stage II/III colon cancer.

Conversion to Open Surgery in Laparoscopic Colorectal Cancer Resection: Predictive Factors and its Impact on Long-Term Outcomes. A Case Series Study

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is the treatment of choice for colorectal cancer. Rates of conversion to open surgery range between 7% and 30% and controversy exists as to the effect of this on oncologic outcomes. The objective of this study was to analyze what factors are predictive of conversion and what effect they have on oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

From a prospective database of patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery between 2000 and 2018 a univariate and multivariate analyses were made of demographic, pathologic, and surgical variables together with complementary treatments comparing purely laparoscopic resection with conversions to open surgery. Overall and disease-free survival were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Of a total of 829 patients, 43 (5.18%) converted to open surgery. In the univariate analysis, 12 variables were significantly associated with conversion, of which left-sided resection [odds ratio (OR): 2.908; P=0.02], resection of the rectum (OR: 4.749, P=0.014), and local invasion of the tumor (OR: 6.905, P<0.01) were independently predictive factors in the multiple logistic regression. Female sex was associated with fewer conversions (OR: 0.375, P=0.012). The incidence and pattern of relapses were similar in both groups and there were no significant differences between overall and disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Left-sided resections, resections of the rectum and tumor invasion of neighboring structures are associated with higher rates of conversion. Female sex is associated with fewer conversions. Conversion to open surgery does not compromise oncologic outcomes at 5 and 10 years.

[Evidence in minimally invasive oncological surgery of the colon and rectum]

An essential component of the treatment of colorectal cancer is a resection of the tumor-bearing segment of the bowels. After the development of minimally invasive procedures the feasibility and safety in oncological, colorectal surgery was questioned. The broad study situation for colon cancer over the last years showed predominantly consistent benefits during the perioperative phase and non-inferiority concerning long-term oncological outcomes. The implementation of laparoscopic rectal resection was more hesitant due to the complexity of the procedure and insufficient study data; however, overall the short-term benefits seem to be maintained and laparoscopic rectal resection is thought to be noninferior to open resection in the long run even though findings on the quality of the resected specimen are heterogeneous. Accordingly, most guidelines now include a recommendation of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer. The limitation with respect to an achievable oncological equivalency of resection takes account of the complexity and the requirements of the intervention only in the setting of rational selection of patients and sufficient experience of the surgeon.

Predictive Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications and Its Impact on Survival in Laparoscopic Resection for Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic resection is the ideal treatment of colon cancer. The aim of the study was to analyze the predictive factors for postoperative complications and their impact on oncologic outcomes in laparoscopic resections in colon cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In all patients undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery the number and degree of severity of postoperative complications were recorded and classified according to Clavien-Dindo. A univariate analysis was made of the demographic, surgical, and oncologic variables of patients with and without complications. The statistically significant variables were then entered into a multivariate model. In both groups overall and disease-free survival were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier estimates.

RESULTS

Of 524 patients, 138 (26.3%) experienced some type of complication, 110 less severe (79.7%) and 28 (20.4%) severe. Twenty-nine conversions to open surgery occurred (5.5%) and hospital mortality was 0.2%.In the multivariate analysis, use of corticosteroids [odds ratio (OR): 3.619], oral anticoagulants (OR: 3.49), blood transfusions (OR: 4.30), and conversion to open surgery (OR: 3.93) were significantly associated with the development of complications. However, sigmoid resections were associated with fewer complications (OR: 0.45).Overall 5-year and 10-year survival in both groups, was 83.3%, 74.1%, 76.0%, and 67.1%, respectively (P=0.18). Disease-free survival at 5 and 10 years, excluding stage IV tumors, was 88.6% and 90.4%, respectively (P=0.881).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of corticosteroids, oral anticoagulants, blood transfusions, and conversion to open surgery are all independent predictive factors of postoperative complications. Sigmoid resections are associated with fewer complications. In laparoscopic resections of the colon, complications do not negatively affect long-term oncologic outcomes.

One-year excess mortality and treatment in surgically treated patients with colorectal cancer: A EURECCA European comparison

BACKGROUND

Mortality in the first postoperative year represents an accurate reflection of the perioperative risk after colorectal cancer surgery. This research compares one-year mortality after surgery divided into three age-categories (18-64, 65-74, ≥75 years), focusing on time trends and comparing treatment strategies.

MATERIAL

Population-based data of all patients diagnosed and treated surgically for stage I-III primary colorectal cancer from 2007 to 2016, were collected from Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden. Stratified for age-category and stage, treatment was evaluated, and 30-day, one-year and one-year excess mortality were calculated for colon and rectal cancer separately. Results were evaluated over two-year time periods.

RESULTS

Data of 206,024 patients were analysed. Postoperative 30-day and one-year mortality reduced significantly over time in all countries and age-categories. Within the oldest age category, in 2015-2016, one-year excess mortality varied from 9% in Belgium to 4% in Sweden for colon cancer and, from 9% in Belgium to 3% in the other countries for rectal cancer. With increasing age, patients were less likely to receive additional therapy besides surgery. In Belgium, colon cancer patients were more often treated with adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.001). For neoadjuvant treatment of rectal cancer, patients in Belgium and Norway were mostly treated with chemoradiotherapy. In the Netherlands and Sweden, radiotherapy alone was preferred (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite improvement over time in all countries and age-categories, substantial variation exists in one-year postoperative mortality. Differences in one-year excess postoperative mortality could be due to differences in treatment strategies, highlighting the consequences of under- and over-treatment on cancer survival.

Risk factors for suboptimal laparoscopic surgery in rectal cancer patients

PURPOSE

Laparoscopic surgery for rectal cancer is technically complex. This study aimed to identify risk factors for suboptimal laparoscopic surgery (involved margins, incomplete mesorectal excision, and/or conversion to open surgery) in patients with rectal cancer.

METHODS

We included patients undergoing laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer between June 2009 and June 2018. We defined the outcome variable suboptimal laparoscopic surgery as conversion to open surgery or inadequate histopathological specimens (margins < 1 mm or involved and/or poor-quality mesorectal excision). To identify independent predictors of suboptimal laparoscopic surgery, we analyzed 15 prospectively recorded demographic, clinical, and anthropometric variables obtained from our rectal cancer unit's database. Subanalyses examined the same variables with respect to conversion and to inadequate histopathological specimens.

RESULTS

Of the 323 patients included, 91 (28.2%) had suboptimal laparoscopic surgery. In the multivariate analysis, the independent factors associated with all suboptimal laparoscopic surgery were tumor location ≤ 5 cm from the anal verge (OR = 2.95, 0.95% CI 1.32-6.60; p = 0.008) and the intertuberous distance (OR = 0.79, 0.95% CI 0.65-0.96; p = 0.019). In the subanalyses, the promontorium-retropubic axis was an independent predictor of conversion (OR 0.70, 0.95% CI 0.51-0.96; p = 0.026), and tumor location ≤ 5 cm from the anal verge (OR 3.71, 0.95% 1.51-9.15; p = 0.004) was an independent predictor of inadequate histopathological specimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Predictive factors for suboptimal laparoscopic anterior resection for rectal cancer were tumor location and the intertuberous distance. These results could help surgeons decide whether to use other surgical approaches in complex cases.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at Clinicaltrials.org (No. NCT03107650).

The power of empirical data; lessons from the clinical registry initiatives in Scandinavian cancer care

BACKGROUND

In Scandinavia, there is a strong tradition for research and quality monitoring based on registry data. In Denmark, Norway and Sweden, 63 clinical registries collect data on disease characteristics, treatment and outcome of various cancer diagnoses and groups based on process-related and outcome-related variables.

AIM

We describe the cancer-related clinical registries, compare organizational structures and quality indicators and provide examples of how these registries have been used to monitor clinical performance, develop prediction models, assess outcome and provide quality benchmarks. Further, we define unmet needs such as inclusion of patient-reported outcome variables, harmonization of variables and barriers for data sharing.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

The clinical registry framework provides an empirical basis for evidence-based development of high-quality and equitable cancer care. The registries can be used to follow implementation of new treatment principles and monitor patterns of care across geographical areas and patient groups. At the same time, the lessons learnt suggest that further developments and coordination are needed to utilize the full potential of the registry initiative in cancer care.

Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer

Background

To evaluate a new procedure in daily clinical practice, it might not be sufficient to rely exclusively on the findings of randomized clinical trials (RCTs). This is the first systematic review providing a synthesis of the most important RCTs and relevant retrospective cohort studies on short- and long-term outcomes of laparoscopic surgery in colon cancer patients.

Materials and methods

In a literature search, more than 1800 relevant publications on the topic were identified. Relevant RCTs and representative high-quality retrospective studies were selected based on the widely accepted Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) criteria. Finally, 9 RCTs and 14 retrospective cohort studies were included.

Results

Laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer is associated with a slightly longer duration of surgery, but a variety of studies show an association with a lower rate of postoperative complications and a shorter duration of hospital stay. Particularly in older patients with more frequent comorbidities, laparoscopy seems to contribute to decreasing postoperative mortality. Concerning long-term oncologic outcomes, the laparoscopic and open techniques were shown to be at least equivalent.

Conclusion

The findings of the existing relevant RCTs on laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer are mostly confirmed by representative retrospective cohort studies based on real-world data; therefore, its further implementation into clinical practice can be recommended.

miR-524-5p inhibits angiogenesis through targeting WNK1 in colon cancer cells

There is increasing evidence that microRNA (miRNA) abnormity is involved in the occurrence and the development of various malignancies, including colon cancer. MiRNA-524-5p has been reported to possess anticancer activity in various tumors, which function is seldom investigated in colon cancer cells. The aim of this study was to explore the effect of the miRNA-524-5p/with-no-lysine kinase 1 (WNK1) system on angiogenesis in a colon cancer cell line (HT-29 and COLO205 cells) and further investigate the potential mechanisms. We found miRNA-524-5p expression was relatively high in COLO205 cells and relatively low in HT-29 cells. Elevating miRNA-524-5p expression inhibited proliferation, induced cycle arrest, diminished vascular endothelial growth factor production, and thereby suppressed angiogenesis in HT-29 cells. WNK1 silencing exerted the ability of antiangiogenesis in HT-29 cells. Besides, miRNA-524-5p deficiency-induced angiogenesis was impeded by WNK1 silence in COLO205 cells. In a murine tumor model, miRNA-524-5p agomir treatment significantly suppressed colon cancer tumorigenicity with the downregulation of WNK1 expression. In summary, our results indicated that miRNA-524-5p inhibited angiogenesis in colon cancer cells via targeting WNK1.NEW & NOTEWORTHY MiRNA-524-5p inhibited angiogenesis in colon cancer cells via targeting with-no-lysine kinase 1.

Effect of nalbuphine on patient controlled intravenous analgesia after radical resection of colon cancer

Effect of nalbuphine on patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after radical resection of colon cancer was explored. Retrospective analyses of 100 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer in Xiang Yang No. 1 People's Hospital, Hubei University of Medicine from June 2014 to December 2016 were made. Forty-seven patients were treated with nalbuphine as experimental group and 53 cases were treated with morphine as control group. All patients received PCIA after surgery. According to visual analogue scale (VAS), pain degree at 2, 4, 8, 12 and 24 h after surgery, total dosage of analgesia pump, total times and effective times of pressing were evaluated. Analgesic satisfaction rate, and adverse reactions such as nausea, vomiting, dizziness and headache at the same time were observed and recorded. The postoperative VAS in the experimental group was evidently lower than that in the control group (P<0.05) at 8, 12 and 24 h after surgery, which was statistically significant. There was no significant difference in postoperative VAS between experimental group and control group at 2 and 4 h after surgery (P>0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions to nausea and vomiting in the experimental group was low. There was no significant difference in the total dosage of analgesia pump, total times and effective times of pressing and analgesic satisfaction rate (P>0.05). After laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer, nalbuphine is effective in PCIA, with low incidence of adverse reactions and high safety.

Comparison of a Five-Year Survival and Cancer Recurrence between Laparoscopically Assisted and Open Colonic Resections due to Adenocarcinoma-a Single Centre Experience

Background and objectives: When resecting colon adenocarcinoma, surgeons decide between the use of laparoscopically assisted and open surgery. Laparoscopic resection is known to have short-term benefits over an open operation. However, researchers are not as unified about the long-term findings. The aim of this research is to elaborate on five-year post-operative differences in survival and cancer recurrence between these two different approaches. Materials and methods: 74 enrolled patients were evaluated five years after a primary operation. We collected dates of deaths of deceased patients and time after operation of possible recurrences. Carcinoma staging was done by a pathologist after operation. Blood samples were taken before surgery in order to measure tumor markers (CA19-9 and CEA). Results: Survival after colonic adenocarcinoma surgery did not differ between the two different surgical approaches (p = 0.151). Recurrence of cancer was not associated with the type of operation (p = 0.532). Patients with recurrence had a 37.6 times greater hazard ratio of dying (95% CI: [12.0, 118]; p < 0.001). Advanced age adversely affected survival: patients aged <65 and 65 years had a 97%, and 57% survival rate, respectively. Patients with elevated tumor markers at operation had a 19.1 greater hazard ratio of dying (95% CI: [5.16, 70.4]; p<0.001). Patients with different TNM stages did not have any statistically significant differences in survival (HR_II = 2.49; 95% CI: [0.67, 9.30]; p_II = 0.173) (HR_III = 2.18; 95% CI: [0.58, 8.12]; p_III = 0.246) or recurrence (p = 0.097). Conclusion: The obtained results suggest that laparoscopic resection of colon cancer is not inferior from an oncologic point of view and results in a similar long-term survival and disease-free interval. Recurrence of carcinoma, older age at initial operation and elevated tumor markers, above a pre-set threshold at operation, were found to be independent factors of lower survival. We believe that the obtained results will be of benefit when choosing treatment for colon adenocarcinoma.

Association of laparoscopic colectomy versus open colectomy on the long-term health-related quality of life of colon cancer survivors

Background

Laparoscopic colectomy (LC) is a less invasive alternative to open colectomy (OC) in the treatment of stage I–III colon cancer. Research on the long-term (5-year post-diagnosis) health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of LC patients is scarce. Our study aimed to compare the long-term HRQOL and psychological well-being of stage I–III colon cancer survivors treated either with LC or OC.

Methods

This study used a German population-based cohort of patients treated with either LC (n = 86) or OC (n = 980). LC patients were matched to OC patients using a propensity score. At 5-year follow-up, patients completed assessments on HRQOL (EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-CR29) and psychological well-being (distress and disease/treatment burden). Least square mean scores of HRQOL were derived using linear regression. Proportions of patients with moderate/high distress and disease/treatment burden were compared with Chi-square tests.

Results

In total, 81 LC patients were matched to 156 OC patients. Generally, LC patients had HRQOL comparable to OC patients, albeit LC patients reported significantly better body image (87.1 versus 81.0, p = 0.03). Distress levels were generally low and comparable between the two groups, even though LC patients were more likely to experience disease recurrence (16% versus 7%, p = 0.02) than OC patients. OC patients were more likely to feel moderate/high levels of burden associated with the treatment (72% versus 56%, p = 0.01) and the time after treatment completion (43% versus 28%, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

LC patients reported comparable long-term HRQOL outcomes but higher levels of psychological well-being than OC patients 5 years after diagnosis, even though LC was associated with higher risk of disease recurrence.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between laparoscopic and open surgery for left-sided colon cancer: a nationwide population-based study

The role of laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer has been supported by the results of randomized controlled trials. However, its benefits and disadvantages in the real world setting should be further assessed with population-based studies.The hospitalization data of patients undergoing open or laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer were sourced from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Patient and hospital characteristics and perioperative outcomes including length of hospital stay, operation time, opioid use, blood transfusion, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, and use of mechanical ventilation were compared. The overall survival was also assessed. Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery had shorter hospital stay (p < 0.0001) and less demand for opioid analgesia (p = 0.0005). Further logistic regression revealed that patients undergoing open surgery were 1.70, 2.89, and 3.00 times more likely to have blood transfusion, to be admitted to ICU, and to use mechanical ventilation than patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Operations performed in medical centers were also associated with less adverse events. The overall survival was comparable between the 2 groups.With adequate hospital quality and volume, laparoscopic surgery for left-sided colon cancer was associated with improved perioperative outcomes. The long-term survival was not compromised.

National statistics about resection of the primary tumor in asymptomatic patients with Stage IV colorectal cancer and unresectable metastases. Need for improvement in data collection. A systematic review with meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patients with asymptomatic Stage IV colorectal cancer represent a significant heterogeneous group. National statistics represent an effective method to follow in real time the clinical outcomes of patients, and they may represent an important tool to analyze and to compare different therapeutic approaches. The aim of our study was to analyze the reviews of national data and single institutions reports, which compared the clinical outcomes of patients with asymptomatic Stage IV colorectal cancer and un-resectable metastases who had resection of the primary tumor with those who did not have resection. We gave special attention to the number of missing established relevant variables, to determine the appropriateness of the results of the published studies.

MATERIAL

We performed a systematic review of papers comparing patients who had and who had not primary tumor resection. Screened reports included the time of publication from June 2012 to June 2018; 2556 papers were identified and 27 were included into the review. The primary outcome was observed survival. We analyzed the number of major missing variables in National Data Bases and Single Institution Reports, to assess the overall validity of the conclusions of the analyzed reports.

RESULTS

In the majority of the reports and in the meta-analysis of studies with propensity score matching, resection of the primary tumor was correlated to improved survival and to the possibility for a better response to postoperative chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The high number of missing significant variables, and a clear clinical selection in single center reports make any analysis error-prone. National statistics might represent a valid method to follow in real time the clinical outcomes of these patients, comparing different therapeutic approaches. There is the need for improvement in national data collection, to make descriptive national statistics the ground for future progress in treatment. (PROSPERO) CRD 42018089691.

Variation in use of open and laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy and associated outcome metrics in a universal health care system

BACKGROUND

Universal health care (UHC) should ensure equal access to and use of surgery, but few studies have explored variation in UHC systems. The objective was to describe practice of distal pancreatectomy in Norway covered exclusively by an UHC.

METHODS

Data on all patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy from the Norwegian Patient Register over a 5-year period. Age- and gender-adjusted population-based resection rates (adj. per million/yr) for distal pancreatectomy were analysed across 4 regions and outcomes related to splenic salvage rate, hospital stay, reoperation, readmissions and 90-day mortality risk between regions. Risk is reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (c.i.).

RESULTS

Regional difference exist in terms of absolute numbers, with the majority of procedures done in one region (n = 331; 59.7%). Regional variation persisted for age- and gender-adjusted population-rates, with highest rate at 23.8/million/yr and lowest rate at 13.5/mill/yr (for a 176% relative difference; or an absolute difference of +10.3 resections/million/yr). Overall, a lapDP instead of an open DP was 3.5 times more likely in SouthEast compared to all other regions combined (lapDP rate: 83% vrs 24%, respectively; OR 15.4, 95% c.i. 10.1-23.5; P < 0.001). The splenic salvage rate was lower in SouthEast (19.9%) compared to all other regions (average 26.5%; highest in Central-region at 37.0%; P = 0.010 for trend). Controlled for other factors in multivariate regression, 'region' of surgery remained significantly associated with laparoscopic access.

CONCLUSION

Despite a universal health care system, considerable variation exists in resection rates, use of laparoscopy and splenic salvage rates across regions.

Laparoscopic Complete Mesocolic Excision for Right-Sided Colon Cancer: Analysis of Feasibility and Safety from a Single Western Center

BACKGROUND

Colectomies performed according to complete mesocolic excision (CME) principles have demonstrated an improvement in the quality of surgical specimen and a potential improvement of long-term results. Laparoscopic CME right hemicolectomy is considered a demanding procedure and adopted in few centers from the West. The main purpose of this paper is to present a video showing our technique for laparoscopic CME right hemicolectomy and to analyze our short-term results to prove its safety.

METHODS

Data from 38 patients operated on at the Division of General and Hepatobiliary Surgery, University of Verona Hospital Trust, between September 2014 and February 2017, were included in the study.

RESULTS

In the present series, 37% of patients were ≥75 years old, 32% of patients were ASA class 3, 46% of patients had ≥2 comorbidities, 30% of patients had BMI >28 and 17% of patients had ≥2 previous abdominal surgeries. Despite these unfavorable clinic characteristics, no mortality was observed, Clavien-Dindo ≥3 complications occurred in 13.1% and redo surgery in 5.3%. Good quality specimens were obtained with a mean (SD) length of 34.5±7.5 cm, a proximal margin of 16.8±9.2 cm and a distal margin of 14.3±6.4 cm. The mean (SD) number of harvested lymph nodes was 24.3 (8.3).

CONCLUSIONS

When implemented in a Western center, laparoscopic CME right hemicolectomy is feasible and safe and allows obtaining good quality specimens.

Surgical treatment and survival from colorectal cancer in Denmark, England, Norway, and Sweden: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Survival from colorectal cancer has been shown to be lower in Denmark and England than in comparable high-income countries. We used data from national colorectal cancer registries to assess whether differences in the proportion of patients receiving resectional surgery could contribute to international differences in colorectal cancer survival.

METHODS

In this population-based study, we collected data from all patients aged 18-99 years diagnosed with primary, invasive, colorectal adenocarcinoma from Jan 1, 2010, to Dec 31, 2012, in Denmark, England, Norway, and Sweden, from national colorectal cancer registries. We estimated age-standardised net survival using multivariable modelling, and we compared the proportion of patients receiving resectional surgery by stage and age. We used logistic regression to predict the resectional surgery status patients would have had if they had been treated as in the best performing country, given their individual characteristics.

FINDINGS

We extracted registry data for 139 457 adult patients with invasive colorectal adenocarcinoma: 12 958 patients in Denmark, 97 466 in England, 11 450 in Norway, and 17 583 in Sweden. 3-year colon cancer survival was lower in England (63·9%, 95% CI 63·5-64·3) and Denmark (65·7%, 64·7-66·8) than in Norway (69·5%, 68·4-70·5) and Sweden (72·1%, 71·2-73·0). Rectal cancer survival was lower in England (69·7%, 69·1-70·3) than in the other three countries (Denmark 72·5%, 71·1-74·0; Sweden 74·1%, 72·7-75·4; and Norway 75·0%, 73·1-76·8). We found no significant differences in survival for patients with stage I disease in any of the four countries. 3-year survival after stage II or III rectal cancer and stage IV colon cancer was consistently lower in England (stage II rectal cancer 86·4%, 95% CI 85·0-87·6; stage III rectal cancer 75·5%, 74·2-76·7; and stage IV colon cancer 20·5%, 19·9-21·1) than in Norway (94·1%, 91·5-96·0; 83·4%, 80·1-86·1; and 33·0%, 31·0-35·1) and Sweden (92·9%, 90·8-94·6; 80·6%, 78·2-82·7; and 23·7%, 22·0-25·3). 3-year survival after stage II rectal cancer and stage IV colon cancer was also lower in England than in Denmark (stage II rectal cancer 91·2%, 88·8-93·1; and stage IV colon cancer 23·5%, 21·9-25·1). The total proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery ranged from 47 803 (68·4%) of 69 867 patients in England to 9582 (81·3%) of 11 786 in Sweden for colon cancer, and from 16 544 (59·9%) of 27 599 in England to 4106 (70·8%) of 5797 in Sweden for rectal cancer. This range was widest for patients older than 75 years (colon cancer 19 078 [59·7%] of 31 946 patients in England to 4429 [80·9%] of 5474 in Sweden; rectal cancer 4663 [45·7%] of 10 195 in England to 1342 [61·9%] of 2169 in Sweden), and the proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery was consistently lowest in England. The age gradient of the decline in the proportion of patients treated with resectional surgery was steeper in England than in the other three countries in all stage categories. In the hypothetical scenario where all patients were treated as in Sweden, given their age, sex, and disease stage, the largest increase in resectional surgery would be for patients with stage III rectal cancer in England (increasing from 70·3% to 88·2%).

INTERPRETATION

Survival from colon cancer and rectal cancer in England and colon cancer in Denmark was lower than in Norway and Sweden. Survival paralleled the relative provision of resectional surgery in these countries. Differences in patient selection for surgery, especially in patients older than 75 years or individuals with advanced disease, might partly explain these differences in international colorectal cancer survival.

FUNDING

Early Diagnosis Policy Research Grant from Cancer Research UK (C7923/A18348).

Short-term outcomes after elective colon cancer surgery: an observational study from the Norwegian registry for gastrointestinal and HPB surgery, NoRGast

BACKGROUND

To describe the real burden of major complications after elective surgery for colon cancer in Norway, and to assess which predictors that are significantly associated with the short-term outcome.

METHODS

An observational, multi-centre analysis of prospectively registered colon resections registered into the Norwegian Registry for Gastrointestinal Surgery, NoRGast, between January 2014 and December 2016. A propensity score-adjusted subgroup analysis for surgical access groups was attempted, with laparoscopic resections grouped as intention-to-treat.

RESULTS

Out of 1812 resections, 14.0% of patients experienced a major complication within 30 days following surgery. The over-all reoperation rate was 8.7%, and rate of reoperation for anastomotic leak was 3.8%. Twenty patients (1.1%) died within 30 days after surgery. Higher age was not a significant predictor of major complications, including 30-day mortality. After correction for all co-variables, open access surgery was associated with higher rates of major complications (OR 1.67 (CI 1.22-2.29), p = 0.002), higher 30-day mortality (OR 4.39 (CI 1.19-16.13) p = 0.026) and longer length-of-stay (HR 0.58 (CI 0.52-0.65) p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate a low complication burden and high rate of uneventful patient journeys after elective surgery for colon cancer in Norway. Age was not associated with higher morbidity or mortality rates. Open access surgery was associated with an inferior short-term outcome.

Minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer remains underutilized in Germany despite its nationwide application over the last decade

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) has superior short-term outcomes than open surgery (OS) for colorectal cancer (CRC). However, a nationwide dataset has not been analysed to confirm these findings. We evaluated the distribution and outcomes of MIS for CRC from 2005 to 2015; all in-patients with CRC surgery procedure codes were identified from hospital data, which are entered into the nationwide diagnosis-related group database and forwarded anonymised to the Federal Bureau of Statistics. We determined absolute MIS, morbidity, and mortality rates for specific sub-categories, including procedure type. We identified 345,913 in-patient files. The MIS rate increased from 6.4% (n = 2366; 2005) to 28.5% (n = 8363; 2015), with the highest rates for sigmoid colon (38%) and rectal (39%) resections. The overall conversion rate was 14.4%, without noticeable improvement over time. International Classification of Disease codes related to postoperative complications were documented more frequently after OS than after MIS. OS was associated with a higher mortality rate (4.7%) than MIS (1.8%) (P < 0.001), even after stratifying patients according to the resection site. Use of MIS remains low in Germany compared with that in other European countries. Underutilization of MIS has to be addressed in the future by promoting structured training programs and standardization of laparoscopic surgery.

Effects of laparoscopic surgery on survival, quality of care and utilization in patients with colon cancer: a population-based study

OBJECTIVE

Laparoscopy is a safe and effective treatment for colon cancer. However, its effects on short- and long-term health outcomes and medical utilization are not fully elucidated. This study aimed to compare short- and long-term utilization and health outcomes of colon cancer patients who underwent either laparoscopic or open surgery in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

This study was conducted by linking data from Taiwan Cancer Registry, National Health Insurance claims and Death Registry. Patients aged 18 and older with colon cancer between 2009 and 2012 were included in the study. Propensity score matching was used to minimize selection bias between laparoscopic and open surgery groups. Cox proportional hazard regression and generalized linear mixed logistic regression were used to test hypotheses.

RESULTS

Among the 11,269 colon cancer patients who underwent colectomy, 3236 (28.72%) received laparoscopy and 8033 (71.28%) underwent open surgery. Patients who received laparoscopic surgery had better overall survival (HR = 0.82; 95% CI: 0.70-0.97). These patients also had lower 30 day mortality (0.44% vs. 0.91%), lower 1 year mortality (2.83% vs. 4.68%), lower overall occurrence of complications (6.16% vs. 8.77%), shorter mean length of stay (12.53 vs. 14.93 days) and lower cost for index hospitalization (US$4325.34 vs. US$4453.90). No significant differences were observed in medical utilization over a period of 365 days after the surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results demonstrate that, in both the short- and long-term post-operation periods, laparoscopic surgery reduced the likelihood of postoperative complications, 30 day, and 1 year mortality while being no more expensive than open surgery for colon cancer.

Laparoscopic right-sided colon resection for colon cancer-has the control group so far been chosen correctly?

Background

The treatment strategies for colorectal cancer located in the right side of the colon have changed dramatically during the last decade. Due to the introduction of complete mesocolic excision (CME) with central ligation of the vessels and systematic lymph node dissection, the long-term survival of affected patients has increased significantly. It has also been proposed that right-sided colon resection can be performed laparoscopically with the same extent of resection and equal long-term results.

Methods

A retrospective evaluation of a prospectively expanded database on right-sided colorectal cancer or adenoma treated at the University Hospital of Wuerzburg between 2009 and 2016 was performed. All patients underwent CME. This data was analyzed alone and in comparison to the published data describing laparoscopic right-sided colon resection for colon cancer.

Results

The database contains 279 patients, who underwent right-sided colon resection due to colorectal cancer or colorectal adenoma (255 open; 24 laparoscopic). Operation data (time, length of stay, time on ICU) was equal or superior to laparoscopy, which is comparable to the published results. Surprisingly, the surrogate parameter for correct CME (the number of removed lymph nodes) was significantly higher in the open group. In a subgroup analysis only including patients who were feasible for laparoscopic resection and had been operated with an open procedure by an experienced surgeon, operation time was significantly shorter and the number of removed lymph nodes is significantly higher in the open group.

Conclusion

So far, several studies demonstrate that laparoscopic right-sided colon resection is comparable to open resection. Our data suggests that a consequent CME during an open operation leads to significantly more removed lymph nodes than in laparoscopically resected patients and in several so far published data of open control groups from Europe. Further prospective randomized trials comparing the long-term outcome are urgently needed before laparoscopy for right-sided colon resection can be recommended ubiquitously.

Achieving high quality standards in laparoscopic colon resection for cancer: A Delphi consensus-based position paper

AIM

To investigate the rate of laparoscopic colectomies for colon cancer using registries and population-based studies. To provide a position paper on mini-invasive (MIS) colon cancer surgery based on the opinion of experts leader in this field.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted using PRISMA guidelines for the rate of laparoscopy in colon cancer. Moreover, Delphi methodology was used to reach consensus among 35 international experts in four study rounds. Consensus was defined as an agreement ≥75.0%. Domains of interest included nosology, essential technical/oncological requirements, outcomes and MIS training.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies from 42 articles were reviewed. Although it is still sub-optimal, the rate of MIS for colon cancer increased over the years and it is currently >50% in Korea, Netherlands, UK and Australia. The remaining European countries are un-investigated and presented lower rates with highest variations, ranging 7-35%. Using Delphi methodology, a laparoscopic colectomy was defined as a "colon resection performed using key-hole surgery independently from the type of anastomosis". The panel defined also the oncological requirements recognized essential for the procedure and agreed that when performed by experienced surgeons, it should be marked as best practice in guidelines, given the principles of oncologic surgery be respected (R0 procedure, vessel ligation and mesocolon integrity).

CONCLUSION

The rate of MIS colectomies for cancer in Europe should be further investigated. A panel of leaders in this field defined laparoscopic colectomy as a best practice procedure when performed by an experienced surgeon respecting the standards of surgical oncology.

Improved perioperative care is associated with improved long-term survival in colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

To compare perioperative colorectal cancer care and survival in patient cohorts operated in 2005 and in 2010 in Lithuania.

METHODS

Comparative observational cohort study was performed. The study was conducted in the three Lithuanian cancer hospitals. Patients, who underwent curative surgery for colorectal cancer in 2005 and 2010, were included. Demographic characteristics, distribution of the tumors, preoperative diagnostics and staging, surgical treatment, the quality of pathological examination, morbidity, and mortality were analyzed. One- and 5-year overall survival data were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

Colorectal cancer diagnostics and treatment improved from 2005 to 2010 significantly. The disease was identified as stage III-IV for 45 vs. 48% of the patients; however, computed tomography staging scan was performed only for 5.9 vs. 17.8% in 2005 and 2010, respectively. Laparoscopic operations were performed 1.5 vs. 10.5% and abdominoperineal resections-42.7 vs. 31.7% in 2005 and 2010, respectively. The number of harvested lymph nodes was mentioned in 55.8 vs. 97.7% of the cases, whereas more than 12 lymph nodes were examined in 18 vs. 66.6% of cases after histological examination. The overall 5-year survival was 52.1 vs. 63.1% (p < 0.0001), while the 5-year survival of the patients with stage IV of disease was 4.2 vs. 17.8% in 2005 and 2010, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative investigation, surgical treatment, pathological examination, and postoperative course are associated with improved overall survival in colorectal cancer patients, undergoing curative surgery in the resource-limited settings.

Long-term oncologic outcomes after laparoscopic vs. open colon cancer resection: a high-quality population-based analysis in a Southern German district

Background

Over 20 years after the introduction of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer, many surgeons still prefer the open approach. Whereas randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have proven the oncologic safety of laparoscopy, long-term data depicting daily clinical routine are scarce.

Methods

This population-based cohort study compares 5-year overall, relative, and recurrence-free survival rates after laparoscopic and open colon carcinoma surgery. Data derive from an independent German cancer registry encompassing all tumor patients within a political district of 1.1 million inhabitants. The final analysis included 2669 patients with major elective resection of primary non-metastatic colonic adenocarcinoma between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2013. Survival rates were compared using Kaplan–Meier analyses, relative survival models, and multivariate Cox regression. Sensitivity analysis quantified selection bias.

Results

The proportion of laparoscopic procedures increased from 9.7 to 25.8% in 2011 and dropped again to 15.8% at the end of observation period. Laparoscopy patients were younger, had a lower tumor stage, and were more likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy. Overall, relative, and recurrence-free survival was significantly superior or equivalent in Kaplan–Meier analysis (5-year overall survival rate open vs. laparoscopic: 69.0 vs. 80.2%, p < 0.001). The superiority of laparoscopy mostly remained stable after adjusting for confounders, although significance was only reached in T1-3 patients without lymph node metastases (overall survival: hazard ratio (HR) 0.654; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.446–0.958; p = 0.029).

Conclusion

Laparoscopy is a safe and promising alternative to the open approach in daily clinic practice. These favorable outcomes require future confirmation by high-quality studies outside the setting of RTCs.

Laparoscopic conversion in colorectal cancer surgery; is there any improvement over time at a population level?

Conversion of laparoscopic colorectal cancer resection has been associated with worse outcome, but this might have been related to a learning curve effect. This study aimed to evaluate incidence, predictive factors and outcomes of laparoscopic conversion after the implementation phase of laparoscopic surgery at a population level. Patients undergoing elective resection of non-locally advanced, non-metastatic colorectal cancer between 2011 and 2015 were included. Data were extracted from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients were grouped as laparoscopic completed (LR), laparoscopic converted (CONV) with further specification of timing (within or after 30 min) as registered in the DSCA, and open resection (OR). Uni- and multi-variate analyses were used to determine predictors of conversion and outcome (complicated course and mortality), with evaluation of trends over time. A total of 23,044 patients with colon cancer and 11,324 with rectal cancer were included. Between 2011 and 2015, use of laparoscopy increased from 55 to 84% in colon cancer, and from 49 to 89% in rectal cancer. Conversion rates decreased from 11.8 to 8.6% and from 13 to 8.0%, respectively. Laparoscopic hospital volume was independently associated with conversion rate. Only for colon cancer, the rate of complicated course was significantly higher after CONV compared to OR (adjusted odds ratio 1.486; 95% CI 1.298-1.702), and significantly higher after late (> 30 min) compared to early conversion (adjusted odds ratio 1.341; 1.046-1.719). There was no impact of CONV on mortality in both colon and rectal cancer. The use of laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery increased to more than 80% at a national level, accompanied by a decrease in conversion which is significantly related to the laparoscopic hospital volume. Conversion was only associated with complicated course in colon cancer, especially when the reason for conversion consisted of an intra-operative complication, without affecting mortality.

Implementation of laparoscopic approach in colorectal surgery - a single center's experience

Introduction

Implementation of the laparoscopic approach in colorectal surgery has not happened as rapidly as in cholecystectomy, because of concerns about oncological safety. The results of controlled trials in multiple centers showed the method to be safe. Consequently, surgeons decided to try the approach with colorectal surgery. This process, in our clinic, began in earnest about four years ago.

Aim

To analyze and present the clinical outcomes of applying the laparoscopic approach to colorectal surgery in a single center.

Material and methods

We retrospectively identified patients from a hospital database who underwent colorectal surgery – laparoscopic and open – between 2013 and 2016. Our focus was on laparoscopic cases. Study points included operative time, duration of the hospital stay, postoperative mortality and rates of complications, conversion, reoperation and readmission.

Results

Of 534 cases considered, the results showed that the relation between open and laparoscopic procedures had reversed, in favor of the latter method (2013: open: 82% vs. laparoscopic: 18%; 2016: open: 22.4% vs. laparoscopic: 77.6%). The most commonly performed procedure was right hemicolectomy. The total complication rate was 22%. The total rate of conversion to open surgery was 9.3%. The postoperative mortality rate was 3%.

Conclusions

Use of the laparoscopic approach in colorectal surgery has increased in recent years world-wide – including in Poland – but the technique is still underused. Rapid implementation of the miniinvasive method in colorectal surgery, in centers with previous laparoscopic experience, is not only safe and feasible, but also highly recommended.

Selection Bias in Colorectal Surgery in a Non-Tertiary Hospital: Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Laparoscopy is used increasingly to treat malignant and benign colorectal surgical diseases. However, this practice is still not offered to all patients. Many barriers halt the widespread use of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Both surgeon's and patient's factors contribute to limit a wider use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 408 consecutive colorectal resections in a 4-year period, to find out if a selection bias exists in using laparotomy or laparoscopy for colorectal surgical diseases, and which factors are associated with a poor use of laparoscopy or to a preferred laparotomy.

RESULTS

In our practice, advanced disease, American Society of Anesthesiologist class III and IV, and emergency status are all patient-related factors associated with laparotomy. Surgeon's age more than 52 years and lack of laparoscopic training are surgeon-related factors that negatively affect the chance of being operated on with the laparoscopic technique.

CONCLUSIONS

An extensive laparoscopic colorectal training and a supporting environment, especially during the night shift, are needed to facilitate the use of laparoscopy in colorectal surgery avoiding a bias in selecting surgical candidates to one technique or another.

Descriptive characteristics of colon and rectal cancer recurrence in a Danish population-based study

BACKGROUND

Recurrence is a common outcome among patients that have undergone an intended curative resection for colorectal cancer. However, data on factors that influence colorectal cancer recurrence are sparse. We report descriptive characteristics of both colon and rectal cancer recurrence in an unselected population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We identified 21,152 patients with colorectal cancer diagnosed between May 2001 and December 2011 and registered with the Danish Colorectal Cancer Group. Recurrences were identified in 3198 colon and 1838 rectal cancer patients during follow-up. We calculated the frequency, proportion, and incidence rates of colon and rectal cancer recurrence within descriptive categories, and the cumulative five- and ten-year incidences of recurrence, treating death as a competing risk. We used a Cox proportional hazard model to calculate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

Recurrence risk was highest in the first three years of follow-up. Patients <55 years old at initial diagnosis (incidence rate for colon: 7.2 per 100 person-years; 95% CI: 6.5-7.9; rectum: 8.1 per 100 person-years; 95% CI: 7.2-9.0) and patients diagnosed with stage III cancer (colon HR: 5.70; 95% CI: 4.61-7.06; rectal HR: 7.02; 95% CI: 5.58-8.82) had increased risk of recurrence. Patients diagnosed with stage III cancer from 2009 to 2011 had a lower incidence of recurrence than those diagnosed with stage III cancer in the years before. Cumulative incidences of colon and rectal cancer recurrence were similar for both cancer types among each descriptive category.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population, increases in colorectal cancer recurrence risk were associated with younger age and increasing stage at diagnosis. Cumulative incidence of recurrence did not differ by cancer type. Descriptive characteristics of colon and rectal cancer recurrence may help to inform patient-physician decision-making, and could be used to determine adjuvant therapies or tailor surveillance strategies so that recurrence may be identified early, particularly within the first 3 years of follow-up.

Toward standardization of laparoscopic resection for colorectal cancer in developing countries: A step by step module

BACKGROUND

Despite the proven benefits, laparoscopic colorectal surgery is still underutilized among surgeons especially in developing countries. Also a steep learning is one of the causes of its limited adoption.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the learning curve of single surgeon experience in laparoscopic colectomy and feasibility of implementing a well standardized step by step operative technique to overcome the beginning technical obstacles.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective study included 50 patients with carcinoma of the left colon and rectum recruited from the department of surgical oncology at National Cancer Institute, Cairo University in the period 2012-2016. All the procedures were performed through laparoscopic approach. Intra and post-operative data were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age was 49.7±10.6years (range: 33-74years). They were 29 males and 21 females. The mean operation time was 180min (range 100-370min), and the mean blood loss was 350ml (60-600ml). Six patients (12%) were converted to a laparotomy. The median lymph nodes harvest was 12 (range 7-25). The mean time of passing flatus after surgery was 2days (1-4days) and the mean time of passing stools was 3.3days (2-5) days. The median hospitalization period after surgery was 4days (3-12). 5 patients (10%) had postoperative morbidity, major morbidity occurred in one patient.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic colorectal surgery for colorectal cancer is safe and oncologically sound, standardized well-structured laparoscopic technique masters the procedure even in early learning curve setting.

Laparoscopy may decrease morbidity and length of stay after elective colon cancer resection, especially in frail patients: results from an observational real-life study

BACKGROUND

Advantages of laparoscopic approach in colon cancer surgery have been previously demonstrated in controlled, randomized trials and in retrospective analysis of large administrative databases. Nevertheless, evidence of these advantages in prospective, observational studies from real-life settings is scarce.

METHODS

This is a prospective, observational study, including a consecutive series of patients that underwent elective colonic resection for cancer in 52 Spanish hospitals. Pre-/intraoperative data, related to patient, tumor, surgical procedure, and hospital, were recorded as well as 60-day post-operative outcomes, including wound infection, complications, anastomotic leak, length of stay, and mortality. A univariate and multivariate analysis was performed to determine the influence of laparoscopy on short-term post-operative outcome. A sub-analysis of the effect of laparoscopy according to patients' pre-operative risk (ASA Score I-II vs. III-IV) was also performed.

RESULTS

2968 patients were included: 44.2% were initially operated by laparoscopy, with a 13.9% conversion rate to laparotomy. At univariate analysis, laparoscopy was associated with a decreased mortality (p = 0.015), morbidity (p < 0.0001), wound infection (p < 0.0001), and post-operative length of stay (p < 0.0001). At multivariate analysis, laparoscopy resulted as an independent protective factor for morbidity (OR 0.7; p = 0.004), wound infection (OR 0.6; p < 0.0001), and length of post-operative stay (Effect-2 days; p < 0.0001), compared to open approach. These advantages were more relevant in high-risk patients (ASA III-IV), even if the majority of them were operated by open approach (67.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-life setting, laparoscopy decreases wound infection rate, post-operative complications, and length of stay, especially in ASA III-IV patients.

Comparative Analysis of Perioperative Outcomes and Costs Between Laparoscopic and Open Antireflux Surgery

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic antireflux surgery (LARS) has proven to be as effective as open antireflux surgery (OARS), but it is associated with a shorter hospital stay and a faster recover. The aims of this study were to assess the national use of LARS in the US and to compare the perioperative outcomes between laparoscopic and open antireflux procedures in a national cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective population-based analysis was performed using the National Inpatient Sample for the period 2000 to 2013. The study included adult patients (18 years and older) diagnosed with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), who underwent either laparoscopic or open fundoplication. Multivariable linear and logistic regression, adjusted for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital characteristics were used to assess the effect of the laparoscopic approach on patient outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 75,544 patients were included, with 44,089 having LARS (58.4%) and 31,455 having OARS (41.6%). The rate of laparoscopic procedures increased from 24.8 LARS per 100 procedures in 2000, to 84.3 LARS per 100 procedures in 2013 (p < 0.0001). Patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were less likely to experience postoperative venous thromboembolism, wound complications, infection, esophageal perforation, bleeding, cardiac failure, renal failure, respiratory failure, shock, and inpatient mortality. On average, the laparoscopic approach reduced length of stay by 2.1 days, and decreased hospital charges by $9,530.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of the laparoscopic approach for the surgical treatment of GERD has increased significantly in the last decade in the US. This approach is associated with lower morbidity and mortality, shorter hospital stay, and lower costs for the health care system.

Laparoscopic resection of a sigmoid colon lipoma in a young female patient: A case report and review of the literature

Lipomas of the sigmoid colon are rare entities. The present case describes a 27-year-old Caucasian woman who underwent a laparoscopic sigmoidectomy following the detection of a giant lipoma. The young patient was referred to the Emergency Department of the University Hospital of Heraklion (Crete, Greece) in May 2013 after experiencing intermittent abdominal cramping during defecation, and altering episodes of diarrhea and constipation. In addition, the patient described the protrusion of a solid tissue mass shaped like a 'champagne bottle cork' from the anus following defecation. These symptoms had been present for 1 month prior to referral. Physical examination was unremarkable. An urgent colonoscopy revealed a polypoid lesion measuring 2.5 cm in diameter in the sigmoid colon, which was located ~12 cm above the anal ring, with a smooth surface and tissue fragility. Tissue samples were obtained and sent for histopathological analysis. Preoperative contrast-enhanced computed tomography was performed urgently and confirmed the presence of a solid mass in the sigmoid colon without enlargement of regional lymph nodes. Following adequate preparation, the patient underwent a laparoscopic sigmoidectomy with intracorporeal termino-terminal colorectal anastomosis, with the use of a circular stapler. The patient had a positive post-operative outcome without complications and was discharged on day 4 post-surgery in an optimal condition. Histopathological examination of the surgical specimen demonstrated a pedunculated lipoma shaped like a 'champagne bottle cork'. The tumor consisted of mature adipose cells. The overlying colonic mucosa showed hyperplastic crypts with regenerative changes. In the lamina propria mild inflammatory infiltration was observed. At 2 years post-surgery, the patient remains asymptomatic without any clinical evidence of recurrence.

Network meta-analysis of protocol-driven care and laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic approaches and standardized recovery protocols have reduced morbidity following colorectal cancer surgery. As the optimal regimen remains inconclusive, a network meta-analysis was undertaken of treatments for the development of postoperative complications and mortality.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, trial registries and related reviews were searched for randomized trials comparing laparoscopic and open surgery within protocol-driven or conventional perioperative care for colorectal cancer resection, with complications as a defined endpoint. Relative odds ratios (ORs) for postoperative complications and mortality were estimated for aggregated data.

RESULTS

Forty trials reporting on 11 516 randomized patients were included with the network. Open surgery within conventional perioperative care was the index for comparison. The OR relating to complications was 0·77 (95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 0·91) for laparoscopic surgery within conventional care, 0·69 (0·48 to 0·99) for open surgery within protocol-driven care, and 0·43 (0·28 to 0·67) for laparoscopic surgery within protocol-driven care. Sensitivity analyses excluding trials of low rectal cancer and those with a high risk of bias did not affect the treatment estimates. Meta-analyses demonstrated that mortality risk was unaffected by perioperative strategy.

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic surgery combined with protocol-driven care reduces colorectal cancer surgery complications, but not mortality. The reduction in complications with protocol-driven care is greater for open surgery than for laparoscopic approaches. Registration number: CRD42015017850 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO).

Laparoscopic surgery in patients with colon cancer: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

The long-term outcomes after laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer remain debatable, as randomized trials have reported similar outcomes for open and laparoscopic surgery but population-based data are scarce. Thus, it is unclear whether, outside of clinical trials, laparoscopic surgery that is performed as a standard clinical treatment has detrimental effects on patients' long-term survival.

METHODS

This study examined a unified database of 30 German regional cancer registries for patients with colorectal cancer who were diagnosed between 2003 and 2011. Among 216,682 patients with colorectal carcinoma, we identified 37,068 patients with Union for International Cancer Control stage I-III colon carcinoma (>12 cm from the anal verge), including 3825 patients (10.38 %) who underwent laparoscopic surgery. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were also used to evaluate factors that influenced the likelihood of a patient undergoing laparoscopic surgery. Kaplan-Meier analysis with the log-rank test was used to analyse differences in short- and long-term survival outcomes after open or laparoscopic surgery.

RESULTS

Younger age, lower T-stage, and left-sided surgery were independent predictors of the patient undergoing laparoscopic surgery (all, p < 0001). The 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower for patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery for left-sided tumours (odds ratio [OR] 0.49; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.77). Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery was a significant and independent predictor of prolonged long-term survival for right- and left-sided surgeries (right-side, OR 0.67; 95 % CI 0.56-0.82; left-sided, OR 0.70; 95 % CI 0.62-0.78).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that laparoscopic surgery provides favourable outcomes even when used outside controlled trials and should be considered as a standard treatment for patients with colon cancer.

Assessment of clinically related outcomes and biomarker analysis for translational integration in colorectal cancer (ACROBATICC): study protocol for a population-based, consecutive cohort of surgically treated colorectal cancers and resected colorectal liver metastasis

Background

More accurate predictive and prognostic biomarkers for patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) primaries or colorectal liver metastasis (CLM) are needed. Outside clinical trials, the translational integration of emerging pathways and novel techniques should facilitate exploration of biomarkers for improved staging and prognosis.

Methods

An observational study exploring predictive and prognostic biomarkers in a population-based, consecutive cohort of surgically treated colorectal cancers and resected colorectal liver metastases. Long-term outcomes will be cancer-specific survival, recurrence-free survival and overall survival at 5 years from diagnosis. Beyond routine clinicopathological and anthropometric characteristics and laboratory and biochemistry results, the project allows for additional blood samples and fresh-frozen tumour and normal tissue for investigation of circulating tumour cells (CTCs) and novel biomarkers (e.g. immune cells, microRNAs etc.). Tumour specimens will be investigated by immunohistochemistry in full slides. Extracted DNA/RNA will be analysed for genomic markers using specific PCR techniques and next-generation sequencing (NGS) panels. Flow cytometry will be used to characterise biomarkers in blood. Collaboration is open and welcomed, with particular interest in mutual opportunities for validation studies.

Status and perspectives

The project is ongoing and recruiting at an expected rate of 120–150 patients per year, since January 2013. A project on circulating tumour cells (CTCs) has commenced, with analysis being prepared. Investigating molecular classes beyond the TNM staging is under way, including characteristics of microsatellite instability (MSI) and elevated microsatellite alterations in selected tetranucleotides (EMAST). Hot spot panels for known mutations in CRC are being investigated using NGS. Immune-cell characteristics are being performed by IHC and flow cytometry in tumour and peripheral blood samples. The project has ethical approval (REK Helse Vest, #2012/742), is financially supported with a Ph.D.-Grant (EMAST project; Folke Hermansen Cancer Fund) and a CTC-project (Norwegian Research Council; O. Nordgård). The ACROBATICC clinical and molecular biobank repository will serve as a long-term source for novel exploratory analysis and invite collaborators for mutual validation of promising biomarker results. The project aims to generate results that can help better discern prognostic groups in stage II/III cancers; explore prognostic and predictive biomarkers, and help detail the biology of colorectal liver metastasis for better patient selection and tailored treatment. The project is registered at http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01762813.