Quality of life in the first 6 weeks following laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery

Effect of increased systemic oxygen delivery on postoperative outcomes and quality of life in elderly undergoing major abdominal surgery: A randomised controlled trial

Studies comparing the intentional increase in oxygen delivery and normal oxygen delivery during general anaesthesia in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery are limited and have reported contradictory findings. Therefore, the study aimed to evaluate the effect of intraoperative increase in systemic oxygen delivery on postoperative outcomes and quality of life in elderly patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. This randomised, blinded, parallel-arm, pragmatic clinical trial included elderly patients of >60 years of age undergoing major abdominal surgery. The patients in the intervention arm received noradrenaline or increased fractional inspiration of oxygen to augment central venous oxygen saturation ⩾75%. The primary outcome measure was composite of in-hospital mortality and major organ complications. The secondary outcome measure included comparison of quality of life. A total of 160 patients were assessed for eligibility, and 146 were randomised in the study groups. The mean arterial and central venous oxygen saturation increased and were significantly higher in the intervention arm. The composite primary outcome occurred in 49.31% in the intervention arm and 57.53% in the usual care arm (relative risk; 95% confidence interval: 0.85; 0.63-1.16; absolute risk reduction; 8.22%; p = 0.32). Furthermore, quality of life at the end of three months was similar (0.658 ± 0.19 versus 0.647 ± 0.19; p = 0.771). In conclusion, central venous oxygen saturation-guided increase in systemic oxygen delivery during the intraoperative period of major abdominal surgery in elderly patients did not reduce predefined composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or organ-specific complications.

Predicting Functional Recovery and Quality of Life in Older Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery: Real-World Data From the International GOSAFE Study

PURPOSE

The GOSAFE study evaluates risk factors for failing to achieve good quality of life (QoL) and functional recovery (FR) in older patients undergoing surgery for colon and rectal cancer.

METHODS

Patients age 70 years and older undergoing major elective colorectal surgery were prospectively enrolled. Frailty assessment was performed and outcomes, including QoL (EQ-5D-3L) recorded (3/6 months postoperatively). Postoperative FR was defined as a combination of Activity of Daily Living ≥5 + Timed Up & Go test <20 seconds + MiniCog >2.

RESULTS

Prospective complete data were available for 625/646 consecutive patients (96.9%; 435 colon and 190 rectal cancer), 52.6% men, and median age was 79.0 years (IQR, 74.6-82.9 years). Surgery was minimally invasive in 73% of patients (321/435 colon; 135/190 rectum). At 3-6 months, 68.9%-70.3% patients experienced equal/better QoL (72.8%-72.9% colon, 60.1%-63.9% rectal cancer). At logistic regression analysis, preoperative Flemish Triage Risk Screening Tool ≥2 (3-month odds ratio [OR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.73; P = .034, 6-month OR, 1.71; 95% CI, 1.06 to 2.75; P = .027) and postoperative complications (3-month OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.20 to 3.42; P = .008, 6-month OR, 2.56; 95% CI, 1.15 to 5.68; P = .02) are associated with decreased QoL after colectomy. Eastern Collaborative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≥2 is a strong predictor of postoperative QoL decline in the rectal cancer subgroup (OR, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.45 to 9.92; P = .006). FR was reported by 254/323 (78.6%) patients with colon and 94/133 (70.6%) with rectal cancer. Charlson Age Comorbidity Index ≥7 (OR, 2.59; 95% CI, 1.26 to 5.32; P = .009), ECOG ≥2 (OR, 3.12; 95% CI, 1.36 to 7.20; P = .007 colon; OR, 4.61; 95% CI, 1.45 to 14.63; P = .009 rectal surgery), severe complications (OR, 17.33; 95% CI, 7.30 to 40.8; P < .001), fTRST ≥2 (OR, 2.71; 95% CI, 1.40 to 5.25; P = .003), and palliative surgery (OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 1.29 to 13.07; P = .017) are risk factors for not achieving FR.

CONCLUSION

The majority of older patients experience good QoL and stay independent after colorectal cancer surgery. Predictors for failing to achieve these essential outcomes are now defined to guide patients' and families' preoperative counseling.

Medium-term surgical outcomes and health-related quality of life after laparoscopic vs open colorectal cancer resection: SF-36 health survey questionnaire

BACKGROUND

Previous studies that compared the postoperative health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes after receiving laparoscopic resection (LR) or open resection (OR) in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) have different conclusions.

AIM

To explore the medium-term effect of postoperative HRQoL in such patients.

METHODS

This study randomized 567 patients undergoing non-metastatic CRC surgery managed by one surgeon to the LR or OR groups. HRQoL was assessed during the preoperative period and 3, 6, and 12 mo postoperative using a modified version of the 36-Item Short Form (SF-36) Health Survey questionnaire, emphasizing eight specific items.

RESULTS

This cohort randomly assigned 541 patients to receive LR (n = 296) or OR (n = 245) surgical procedures. More episodes of postoperative urinary tract infection (P < 0.001), wound infection (P < 0.001), and pneumonia (P = 0.048) were encountered in the OR group. The results demonstrated that the LR group subjectively gained mildly better general health (P = 0.045), moderately better physical activity (P = 0.006), and significantly better social function recovery (P = 0.0001) 3 mo postoperatively. Only the aspect of social function recovery was claimed at 6 mo, with a significant advantage in the LR group (P = 0.001). No clinical difference was found in HRQoL during the 12 mo.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that LR resulted in better outcomes, including intra-operative blood loss, surgery-related complications, course of recovery, and especially some health domains of HRQoL at least within 6 mo postoperatively. Patients should undergo LR if there is no contraindication.

Effect of Sarcopenia on Survival and Health-Related Quality of Life in Patients with Hepatocellular Carcinoma after Hepatectomy

BACKGROUND

Although sarcopenia has been reported as a negative prognostic factor in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the lack of studies with a prospective design utilizing comprehensive sarcopenia assessment with composite endpoints is an important gap in understanding the impact of sarcopenia in patients with HCC. The aim of this study was to investigate the relationship between sarcopenia and postoperative 1-year mortality and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) based on sarcopenia assessment.

METHODS

The study cohort, who received resection surgery for HCC between May 2020 and August 2021, was assessed for sarcopenia based on grip strength, the chair stand test, skeletal muscle mass, and gait speed. The primary outcome measures were 1-year mortality and HRQOL determined using the QLQ-C30 questionnaire. In addition, we collected hospital costs, postoperative hospital stays, complications, 30-day and 90-day mortality, and 90- and 180-day readmission rates. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were conducted to examine factors associated with global health status.

RESULTS

A total of 153 eligible patients were included in the cohort. One-year mortality was higher in patients with sarcopenia than in those without sarcopenia (p = 0.043). There was a correlation between sarcopenia and the surgical approach to global health status (p = 0.025) and diarrhea (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative sarcopenia reduces postoperative survival and health-related quality of life in patients with HCC.

Quality of Life in Older Adults After Major Cancer Surgery: The GOSAFE International Study

BACKGROUND

Accurate quality of life (QoL) data and functional results after cancer surgery are lacking for older patients. The international, multicenter Geriatric Oncology Surgical Assessment and Functional rEcovery after Surgery (GOSAFE) Study compares QoL before and after surgery and identifies predictors of decline in QoL.

METHODS

GOSAFE prospectively collected data before and after major elective cancer surgery on older adults (≥70 years). Frailty assessment was performed and postoperative outcomes recorded (30, 90, and 180 days postoperatively) together with QoL data by means of the three-level version of the EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D-3L), including 2 components: an index (range = 0-1) generated by 5 domains (mobility, self-care, ability to perform the usual activities, pain or discomfort, anxiety or depression) and a visual analog scale.

RESULTS

Data from 26 centers were collected (February 2017-March 2019). Complete data were available for 942/1005 consecutive patients (94.0%): 492 male (52.2%), median age 78 years (range = 70-95 years), and primary tumor was colorectal in 67.8%. A total 61.2% of all surgeries were via a minimally invasive approach. The 30-, 90-, and 180-day mortality was 3.7%, 6.3%, and 9%, respectively. At 30 and 180 days, postoperative morbidity was 39.2% and 52.4%, respectively, and Clavien-Dindo III-IV complications were 13.5% and 18.7%, respectively. The mean EQ-5D-3L index was similar before vs 3 months but improved at 6 months (0.79 vs 0.82; P < .001). Domains showing improvement were pain and anxiety or depression. A Flemish Triage Risk Screening Tool score greater than or equal to 2 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.13 to 2.21, P = .007), palliative surgery (OR = 2.14, 95% CI = 1.01 to 4.52, P = .046), postoperative complications (OR = 1.95, 95% CI = 1.19 to 3.18, P = .007) correlated with worsening QoL.

CONCLUSIONS

GOSAFE shows that older adults' preoperative QoL is preserved 3 months after cancer surgery, independent of their age. Frailty screening tools, patient-reported outcomes, and goals-of-care discussions can guide decisions to pursue surgery and direct patients' expectations.

STRIDE-II: An Update on the Selecting Therapeutic Targets in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (STRIDE) Initiative of the International Organization for the Study of IBD (IOIBD): Determining Therapeutic Goals for Treat-to-Target strategies in IBD

BACKGROUND

The Selecting Therapeutic Targets in Inflammatory Bowel Disease (STRIDE) initiative of the International Organization for the Study of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IOIBD) has proposed treatment targets in 2015 for adult patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We aimed to update the original STRIDE statements for incorporating treatment targets in both adult and pediatric IBD.

METHODS

Based on a systematic review of the literature and iterative surveys of 89 IOIBD members, recommendations were drafted and modified in 2 surveys and 2 voting rounds. Consensus was reached if ≥75% of participants scored the recommendation as 7 to 10 on a 10-point rating scale.

RESULTS

In the systematic review, 11,278 manuscripts were screened, of which 435 were included. The first IOIBD survey identified the following targets as most important: clinical response and remission, endoscopic healing, and normalization of C-reactive protein/erythrocyte sedimentation rate and calprotectin. Fifteen recommendations were identified, of which 13 were endorsed. STRIDE-II confirmed STRIDE-I long-term targets of clinical remission and endoscopic healing and added absence of disability, restoration of quality of life, and normal growth in children. Symptomatic relief and normalization of serum and fecal markers have been determined as short-term targets. Transmural healing in Crohn's disease and histological healing in ulcerative colitis are not formal targets but should be assessed as measures of the remission depth.

CONCLUSIONS

STRIDE-II encompasses evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for treat-to-target strategies in adults and children with IBD. This frameworkshould be adapted to individual patients and local resources to improve outcomes.

Economic analysis of the adoption of capsule endoscopy within the British NHS

Objective

Identification of a cost-effective treatment strategy is an unmet need in Crohn’s disease (CD). Here we consider the patient outcomes and cost impact of pan-intestinal video capsule endoscopy (PVCE) in the English National Health Service (NHS).

Design

An analysis of a protocolized CD care pathway, informed by guidelines and expert consensus, was performed in Microsoft Excel. Population, efficacy and safety data of treatments and monitoring modalities were identified using a structured PubMed review with English data prioritized. Costs were taken from the NHS and Payer Provided Services (PSS) 2016–17 tariffs for England and otherwise literature. Analysis was via a discrete-individual simulation with discounting at 3.5% per annum.

Setting

NHS provider and PSS perspective

Participants

4000 simulated CD patients

Interventions

PVCE versus colonoscopy ± magnetic resonance enterography (MRE)

Main outcome measures

Costs in 2017 GBP and quality-adjusted life years (QALY)

Results

The mean, total 20-year cost per patient was £42 266 with colonoscopy ± MRE and £38 043 with PVCE. PVCE incurred higher costs during the first 2 years due to higher treatment uptake. From year 3 onwards, costs were reduced due to fewer surgeries. Patients accrued 10.67 QALY with colonoscopy ± MRE and 10.96 with PVCE. PVCE dominated (less cost and higher QALY) colonoscopy ± MRE and was likely (>74%) to be considered cost-effective by the NHS. Results were similar if a lifetime time horizon was used.

Conclusions

PVCE is likely to be a cost-effective alternative to colonoscopy ± MRE for CD surveillance. Switching to PVCE resulted in lower treatment costs and gave patients better quality of life.

The Introduction of Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: Can It Improve Hospital Economics?

INTRODUCTION

Clinical benefits of laparoscopic surgery are well established, but evidence for financial benefits is limited. This study aimed to compare the financial impact of the introduction of laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

METHODS

This study included patients who underwent colorectal surgery between January 2010 and 2015. We collected a range of financial data and divided the patients into 2 groups. Primary outcome was total cost defined by surgical-related costs.

RESULTS

A total of 1,246 patients were included, of which 440 surgeries were performed laparoscopically. The total median cost of laparoscopy was higher compared to open surgery (EUR 4,665 vs. EUR 4,268, p = 0.001). Laparoscopy was associated with higher equipment costs (EUR 857 vs. EUR 232, p < 0.001), longer operating time (3.2 vs. 2.5 hours, p < 0.001), and more readmissions (10.9 vs. 8.5%, p < 0.001). However, after adjusting for heterogeneity, no difference was found in total cost. Surgical-related costs were counterbalanced by lower costs associated with shorter median hospital stay (6 vs. 9 days, p < 0.001), less morbidity (37.3 vs. 55.1%, p < 0.001), and less mortality (1.8 vs. 5.6%, p = 0.013) for laparoscopy.

CONCLUSION

During the introduction of laparoscopy for colorectal surgery, no significant differences were found in total cost between laparoscopic and open colorectal surgery. However, favorable postoperative outcomes were achieved with laparoscopic surgery.

Cost utility analysis of continuous and intermittent versus intermittent vital signs monitoring in patients admitted to surgical wards

Background: Complications after surgical procedures are common and can lead to a prolonged hospital stay, increased rates of postoperative hospital readmission, and increased mortality. Monitoring vital signs is an effective way to identify patients who are experiencing a deterioration in health. SensiumVitals is wireless system that includes a lightweight, digital patch that monitors vital signs at two minute intervals, and has shown promise in the early identification of patients at high risk of deterioration.Objective: To evaluate the cost-utility of continuous monitoring of vital signs with SensiumVitals in addition to intermittent monitoring compared to the usual care of patients admitted to surgical wards.Methods: A de novo decision analytic model, based on current treatment pathways, was developed to estimate the costs and outcomes. Results from randomised clinical trials and national standard sources were used to inform the model. Costs were estimated from the NHS and PSS perspective. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted to explore uncertainty surrounding input parameters.Results: Over a 30-day time horizon, intermittent monitoring in addition to continuous monitoring of vital signs with SensiumVitals was less costly than intermittent vital signs monitoring alone. The total cost per patient was £6,329 versus £5,863 for the comparator and intervention groups respectively and the total effectiveness per patient was 0.057 QALYs in each group. Results from the PSA showed that use of SensiumVitals in addition to intermittent monitoring has 73% probability of being cost-effective at a £20,000 willingness-to-pay threshold and 73% probability of being cost-saving compared to the comparator. Cost savings were driven by reduced costs of hospital readmissions and length of stays in hospital.Conclusions: Use of SensiumVitals as a postoperative intervention for patients on surgical wards is a cost-saving and cost-effective strategy, yielding improvements in recovery with decreased health resource use.Key Points for Decision MakersSensiumVitals has the potential to reduce the length of postoperative hospital stay, readmission rates, and associated costs in postoperative patients.In this study, SensiumVitals has been found to be a cost-saving (dominant) and cost-effective (dominant) intervention for monitoring the vital signs of surgical patients postoperatively.

Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes in Laparoscopic and Open Right Hemicolectomy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Open and laparoscopic resections for colon cancer have equivalent perioperative morbidity and mortality. However, there are little data concerning patient-reported outcomes in the early postdischarge period.

OBJECTIVE

We examined patient-reported outcomes in the early postdischarge period for open and laparoscopic right hemicolectomy for colon cancer.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted using linked administrative healthcare databases in the province of Ontario, Canada.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing laparoscopic or open right hemicolectomy for colon cancer between January 2010 and December 2014 were identified using the Ontario Cancer Registry and physician billing data.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the presence of moderate-to-severe symptom scores on the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (≥4 of 10) within 6 weeks of hospital discharge after right hemicolectomy.

RESULTS

A total of 1022 patients completed ≥1 Edmonton Symptom Assessment System survey within 6 weeks of surgery and were included in the study. Patients undergoing laparoscopic resection were more likely to have an urban residence, to have undergone planned resections, and to have had proportionally more stage 1 disease compared with patients undergoing open resection. On multivariable analyses, adjusting for patient demographics, cancer stage, and planned versus unplanned admission status, there were no differences in the adjusted odds of moderate-to-severe symptom scores between the laparoscopic and open approaches.

LIMITATIONS

Edmonton Symptom Assessment System scores are not collected for inpatients and thus only represent outpatient postoperative visits. Scores were reported by 19% of all resections in the population, with a bias to patients treated at cancer centers, and therefore they are not fully representative of the general population of right hemicolectomy. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System is not a disease-specific tool and may not measure all relevant outcomes for patients undergoing right hemicolectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

Receipt of the open or laparoscopic surgical technique was not associated with increased risk of elevated symptom burden in the early postdischarge period. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B27. REPORTE COMPARATIVO DE RESULTADOS INFORMADOS DE PACIENTES CON HEMICOLECTOMÍA DERECHA LAPAROSCÓPICA Y ABIERTA: UN ESTUDIO DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVO: Las resecciones abiertas y laparoscópicas para el cáncer de colon, presentan semejante morbilidad y mortalidad perioperatoria. Sin embargo, en el período inicial posterior al alta, hay pocos datos sobre los resultados informados por los pacientes.Examinamos los resultados informados por los pacientes, en el período temprano posterior al alta, para hemicolectomía derecha abierta y laparoscópica en cáncer de colon.Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.El estudio se realizó utilizando bases de datos administrativas de atención médica en la provincia de Ontario, Canadá.Pacientes sometidos a hemicolectomía derecha abierta o laparoscópica para cáncer de colon, de enero 2010 a diciembre 2014, se identificaron mediante el Registro de cáncer de Ontario y de los datos médicos de facturación.El resultado primario, después de la hemicolectomía derecha, fue la presencia de síntomas de moderados a graves en el Sistema de evaluación de síntomas de Edmonton (≥4 de cada 10) dentro de las seis semanas posteriores al alta hospitalaria.Un total de 1022 pacientes completaron al menos una encuesta del Sistema de evaluación de síntomas de Edmonton, dentro de las seis semanas de la cirugía y se incluyeron en el estudio. Los pacientes sometidos a resección laparoscópica fueron más propensos a residir en zona urbana, a resecciones planificadas y proporcionalmente más enfermedad en estadio 1; en comparación con los pacientes sometidos a resecciones abiertas. En los análisis multivariables, que se ajustaron a la demografía del paciente, al estadio del cáncer y del estado de ingreso planificado versus no planificado, no hubo diferencias en las probabilidades ajustadas de las puntuaciones de los síntomas moderados a severos entre el abordaje abierto o laparoscópico.Las puntuaciones del Sistema de evaluación de síntomas de Edmonton no se recopilan para pacientes hospitalizados y por lo tanto, solo representan las visitas postoperatorias de pacientes ambulatorios. Las puntuaciones informadas fueron del 19% de todas las resecciones en la población, con un sesgo en los pacientes tratados en los Centros de Cáncer y por lo tanto, no son totalmente representativos de la población general de hemicolectomía derecha. El Sistema de evaluación de síntomas de Edmonton no es una herramienta específica de la enfermedad y puede no medir todos los resultados relevantes para los pacientes que se someten a una hemicolectomía derecha.La recepción entre una técnica quirúrgica abierta o laparoscópica, no se asoció con un aumento del riesgo de síntomas en el período temprano posterior al alta. Vea el Resumen del Video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B27.

The ALCCaS Trial: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Quality of Life Following Laparoscopic Versus Open Colectomy for Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study reports the quality-of-life assessment of the ALCCaS trial. The ALCCaS trial compared laparoscopic and open resection for colon cancer. It reported equivalence of survival at 5 years. Quality of life was measured as a secondary outcome.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to report on the quality of life data of the ALCCaS Trial.

DESIGN

This study reports a randomized controlled trial comparing laparoscopic with open colonic resection.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in Australasia.

PATIENTS

Patients with a single adenocarcinoma of the right, left, or sigmoid colon, presenting for elective treatment, were eligible for randomization.

INTERVENTIONS

Open and laparoscopic colonic resections were performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patient symptoms and quality of life were measured using the Symptoms Distress Scale, the Quality of Life Index, and the Global Quality of Life Score preoperatively, and at 2 days, 2 weeks, and 2 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

Of the 592 patients enrolled in ALCCaS, 425 completed at least 1 quality-of-life measure at 4 time points (71.8% of cohort). Those who received the laparoscopic intervention had better quality of life postoperatively in terms of the Symptoms Distress Scale (p < 0.01), Quality of Life Index (p < 0.01), and Global Quality of Life (p < 0.01). In intention-to-treat analyses, those assigned to laparoscopic surgery had a better quality of life postoperatively in terms of the Symptoms Distress Scale (p < 0.01) and Quality of Life Index (p < 0.01), whereas Global Quality of Life was not significant (p = 0.056). The subscales better for laparoscopic resection at all 3 postoperative time points were appetite, insomnia, pain, fatigue, bowel, daily living, and health (p < 0.05).

LIMITATIONS

The primary limitation was the different response rates for the 3 quality-of-life measures.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a short-term gain in quality of life maintained at 2 months postsurgery for those who received laparoscopic relative to open colonic resection. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A691.

Health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness analysis of gum chewing in patients undergoing colorectal surgery: results of a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative ileus (POI) and anastomotic leakage (AL) following colorectal surgery severely increase healthcare costs and decrease quality of life. This study evaluates the effects of reducing POI and AL via perioperative gum chewing compared to placebo (control) on in-hospital costs, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and assesses cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

In patients undergoing elective, open colorectal surgery, changes in HRQoL were assessed using EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaires and costs were estimated from a hospital perspective. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were estimated.

RESULTS

In 112 patients, mean costs for ward stay were significantly lower in the gum chewing group when compared to control (€3522 (95% CI €3034-€4010) versus €4893 (95% CI €3843-€5942), respectively, p = .020). No differences were observed in mean overall in-hospital costs, or in mean change in any of the HRQoL scores or utilities. Gum chewing was dominant (less costly and more effective) compared to the control in more than 50% of the simulations for both POI and AL.

CONCLUSION

Reducing POI and AL via gum chewing reduced costs for ward stay, but did not affect overall in-hospital costs, HRQoL, or mapped utilities. More studies with adequate sample sizes using validated questionnaires at standardized time points are needed.

Patient Perceptions and Quality of Life After Colon and Rectal Surgery: What Do Patients Really Want?

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery outcomes must be accurately assessed and aligned with patient priorities. No study to date has investigated the patient's subjective assessment of outcomes most important to them during and following their surgical recovery. Although surgeons greatly value the benefits of laparoscopy, patient priorities remain understudied.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess what aspects of patients' perioperative care and recovery they value most when queried in the postoperative period.

DESIGN

This study is an exploratory cross-sectional investigation of a defined retrospective patient population. Enrollees were stratified into subcategories and analyzed, with statistical analysis performed via χ test and unpaired t test.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a single academic medical center in New England.

PATIENTS

Patients who underwent a colorectal surgical resection between 2009 and 2015 were selected.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients within a preidentified population were asked to voluntarily complete a 32-item questionnaire regarding their surgical care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were patient perioperative and postoperative quality of life and satisfaction on selected areas of functioning.

RESULTS

Of 167 queried respondents, 92.2% were satisfied with their recovery. Factors considered most important included being cured of colorectal cancer (76%), not having a permanent stoma (78%), and avoiding complications (74%). Least important included length of stay (13%), utilization of laparoscopy (14%), and incision appearance and length (2%, 4%).

LIMITATIONS

The study had a relatively low response rate, the study is susceptible to responder's bias, and there is temporal variability from surgery to questionnaire within the patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, patients reported high satisfaction with their care. Most important priorities included being free of cancer, stoma, and surgical complications. In contrast, outcomes traditionally important to surgeons such as laparoscopy, incision appearance, and length of stay were deemed less important. This research helps elucidate the outcomes patients truly consider valuable, and surgeons should focus on these outcomes when making surgical decisions. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A596. See Visual Abstract at https://tinyurl.com/yb25xl66.

Quality of life after hepatic resection

Background

Long-term quality of life (QoL) after liver resection is becoming increasingly important, as improvements in operative methods and perioperative care have decreased morbidity and mortality rates. In this study, postoperative QoL after resection of benign or malignant liver tumours was evaluated.

Methods

In this single-centre study, QoL was evaluated prospectively using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and the liver-specific QLQ-LMC21 module before, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after open or laparoscopic liver surgery.

Results

Between June 2007 and January 2013, 188 patients (130 with malignant and 58 with benign tumours) requiring major liver resection were included. Global health status was no different between the two groups before and 1 month after liver resection. All patients showed an improvement in global health status at 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Patients with benign tumours had better global health status than those with malignant tumours at these time points (P &lt; 0·001, P = 0·002 and P = 0·006 respectively). Patients with benign disease had better physical function scores (P = 0·011, P = 0·025 and P = 0·041) and lower fatigue scores (P = 0·001, P = 0·002 and P = 0·002) at 3, 6 and 12 months than those with malignant disease.

Conclusion

This study confirmed overall good QoL in patients undergoing liver resection for benign or malignant tumours, which improved after surgery. Benign diseases were associated with better short- and long-term QoL scores.

The potential impact of local excision for T1 colonic cancer in elderly and comorbid populations: a decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Population-based bowel cancer screening has resulted in increasing numbers of patients with T1 colonic cancer. The need for colectomy in this group is questioned due to the low risk of lymphatic spread and increased treatment morbidity, particularly for elderly, comorbid patients. This study examined the quality-of-life benefits and risks of endoscopic resection compared with results after colectomy, for low-risk and high-risk T1 colonic cancer.

METHODS

Decision analysis using a Markov simulation model was performed; patients were managed with either endoscopic resection (advanced therapeutic endoscopy) or colectomy. Lesions were considered high risk according to accepted national guidelines. Probabilities and utilities (perception of quality of life) were derived from published data. Hypothetical cohorts of 65- and 80-year-old, fit and unfit patients with low-risk or high-risk T1 colonic cancer were studied. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) in life-years (QALYs).

RESULTS

In low-risk T1 colonic neoplasia, endoscopic resection increases QALE by 0.09 QALYS for fit 65-year-olds and by 0.67 for unfit 80-year-olds. For high-risk T1 cancers, the QALE benefit for surgical resection is 0.24 QALYs for fit 65-year-olds and the endoscopic QALE benefit is 0.47 for unfit 80-year-olds. The model findings only favored surgery with high local recurrence rates and when quality of life under surveillance was perceived poorly.

CONCLUSIONS

Under broad assumptions, endoscopic resection is a reasonable treatment option for both low-risk and high-risk T1 colonic cancer, particularly in elderly, comorbid patients. Exploration of methods to facilitate endoscopic resection of T1 colonic neoplasia appears warranted.

A new perspective on the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery-payer, provider, and patient benefits

BACKGROUND

The clinical benefits of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) are proven, but overall financial benefits are not fully explored. Our goal was to evaluate the financial benefits of MIS from the payer's perspective to demonstrate the value of minimally invasive colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A Truven MarketScan^® claim-based analysis identified all 2013 elective, inpatient colectomies. Cases were stratified into open or MIS approaches based on ICD-9 procedure codes; then costs were assessed using a similar distribution across diagnosis related groups (DRGs). Care episodes were compared for average allowed costs, complication, and readmission rates after adjusting costs for demographics, comorbidities, and geographic region.

RESULTS

A total of 4615 colectomies were included-2054 (44.5 %) open and 2561 (55.5 %) MIS. Total allowed episode costs were significantly lower MIS than open ($37,540 vs. $45,284, p < 0.001). During the inpatient stay, open cases had significantly greater ICU utilization (3.9 % open vs. 2.0 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher overall complications (52.8 % open vs. 32.3 % MIS, p < 0.001), higher colorectal-specific complications (32.5 % open vs. 17.9 % MIS, p < 0.001), longer LOS (6.39 open vs. 4.44 days MIS, p < 0.001), and higher index admission costs ($39,585 open vs. $33,183 MIS, p < 0.001). Post-discharge, open cases had significantly higher readmission rates/100 cases (11.54 vs. 8.28; p = 0.0013), higher average readmission costs ($3055 vs. $2,514; p = 0.1858), and greater 30-day healthcare costs than MIS ($5699 vs. $4357; p = 0.0033). The net episode cost of care was $7744/patient greater for an open colectomy, even with similar DRG distribution.

CONCLUSIONS

In a commercially insured population, the risk-adjusted allowed costs for MIS colectomy episodes were significantly lower than open. The overall cost difference between MIS and open was almost $8000 per patient. This highlights an opportunity for health plans and employers to realize financial benefits by shifting from open to MIS for colectomy. With increasing bundled payment arrangements and accountable care sharing programs, the cost impact of shifting from open to MIS introduces an opportunity for cost savings.

The LIPPSMAck POP (Lung Infection Prevention Post Surgery - Major Abdominal - with Pre-Operative Physiotherapy) trial: study protocol for a multi-centre randomised controlled trial

Background

Post-operative pulmonary complications are a significant problem following open upper abdominal surgery. Preliminary evidence suggests that a single pre-operative physiotherapy education and preparatory lung expansion training session alone may prevent respiratory complications more effectively than supervised post-operative breathing and coughing exercises. However, the evidence is inconclusive due to methodological limitations. No well-designed, adequately powered, randomised controlled trial has investigated the effect of pre-operative education and training on post-operative respiratory complications, hospital length of stay, and health-related quality of life following upper abdominal surgery.

Methods/design

The Lung Infection Prevention Post Surgery - Major Abdominal- with Pre-Operative Physiotherapy (LIPPSMAck POP) trial is a pragmatic, investigator-initiated, bi-national, multi-centre, patient- and assessor-blinded, parallel group, randomised controlled trial, powered for superiority. Four hundred and forty-one patients scheduled for elective open upper abdominal surgery at two Australian and one New Zealand hospital will be randomised using concealed allocation to receive either i) an information booklet or ii) an information booklet, plus one additional pre-operative physiotherapy education and training session. The primary outcome is respiratory complication incidence using standardised diagnostic criteria. Secondary outcomes include hospital length of stay and costs, pneumonia diagnosis, intensive care unit readmission and length of stay, days/h to mobilise >1 min and >10 min, and, at 6 weeks post-surgery, patient reported complications, health-related quality of life, and physical capacity.

Discussion

The LIPPSMAck POP trial is a multi-centre randomised controlled trial powered and designed to investigate whether a single pre-operative physiotherapy session prevents post-operative respiratory complications. This trial standardises post-operative assisted ambulation and physiotherapy, measures many known confounders, and includes a post-discharge follow-up of complication rates, functional capacity, and health-related quality of life. This trial is currently recruiting.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number: ACTRN12613000664741, 19 June 2013.

Short-term results of quality of life for curatively treated colorectal cancer patients in Lithuania

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment options for colorectal cancer patients create the need to assess the quality of life (QoL) of colorectal cancer patients in the early postoperative period when changes are potentially greatest. The aim of the current study was to assess the QoL of colorectal cancer patients following open and laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 82 consecutive patients requiring elective open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery were recruited to the study for 3 months in the three colorectal surgery centers of Lithuania. Patients completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) questionnaire before surgery, 2 and 5 days, 1 and 3 months after operation. The EORTC QLQ-CR29 questionnaire was completed before surgery and at 1 and 3 months after operation. Analysis was done according to the manual for each instrument.

RESULTS

EORTC QLQ-C30 reflected the postoperative recovery of QoL. The global health status, cognitive and emotional functioning came back to the preoperative level in one month after operation. Physical and role functioning for laparoscopic group was significantly improved in 1 month after operation and in 3 months for open surgery group respectively. Colorectal module EORTC-QLQ-CR29 found that future perspective increased significantly in laparoscopic group 1 month after operation.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study showed that majority of functional scale scores came back to the preoperative level during the first 3 months after colorectal cancer surgery. Differences in QoL according to surgical approach are mostly expressed on this period.

Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection for cancer and polyps: a cost-effectiveness study

Background

Available evidence that compares outcomes from laparoscopic and open surgery for colorectal cancer shows no difference in disease free or survival time, or in health-related quality of life outcomes, but does not capture the short term benefits of laparoscopic methods in the early postoperative period.

Aim

To explore the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic colorectal surgery, compared to open methods, using quality of life data gathered in the first 6 weeks after surgery.

Methods

Participants were recruited in 2006–2007 in a district general hospital in the south of England; those with a diagnosis of cancer or polyps were included in the analysis. Quality of life data were collected using EQ-5D, on alternate days after surgery for 4 weeks. Costs per patient, from a National Health Service perspective (in British pounds, 2006) comprised the sum of operative, hospital, and community costs. Missing data were filled using multiple imputation methods. The difference in mean quality adjusted life years and costs between surgery groups were estimated simultaneously using a multivariate regression model applied to 20 imputed datasets. The probability that laparoscopic surgery is cost-effective compared to open surgery for a given societal willingness-to-pay threshold is illustrated using a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve.

Results

The sample comprised 68 laparoscopic and 27 open surgery patients. At 28 days, the incremental cost per quality adjusted life year gained from laparoscopic surgery was £12,375. At a societal willingness-to-pay of £30,000, the probability that laparoscopic surgery is cost-effective, exceeds 65% (at £20,000 ≈60%). In sensitivity analyses, laparoscopic surgery remained cost-effective compared to open surgery, provided it results in a saving ≥£699 in hospital bed days and takes no more than 8 minutes longer to perform.

Conclusion

The study provides formal evidence of the cost-effectiveness of laparoscopic approaches and supports current guidelines that promote use of laparoscopy where suitably trained surgeons are available.