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

TAilored SToma policY after TME for rectal cancer: The TASTY approach

AIM

Diverting stomas are routinely used in restorative surgery following total mesorectal exicision (TME) for rectal cancer to mitigate the clinical risks of anastomotic leakage (AL). However, routine diverting stomas are associated with their own complication profile and may not be required in all patients. A tailored approach based on personalized risk of AL and selective use of diverting stoma may be more appropriate. The aim of the TAilored SToma policY (TASTY) project was to design and pilot a standardized, tailored approach to diverting stoma in low rectal cancer.

METHOD

A mixed-methods approach was employed. Phase I externally validated the anastomotic failure observed risk score (AFORS). We compared the observed rate of AL in our cohort to the theoretical, predicted risk of the AFORS score. To identify the subset of patients who would benefit from early closure of the diverting stoma using C-reactive protein (CRP) we calculated the Youden index. Phase II designed the TASTY approach based on the results of Phase I. This was evaluated within a second prospective cohort study in patients undergoing TME for rectal cancer between April 2018 and April 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 80 patients undergoing TME surgery for rectal cancer between 2016 and 2018 participated in the external validation of the AFORS score. The overall observed AL rate in this cohort of patients was 17.5% (n = 14). There was a positive correlation between the predicted and observed rates of AL using the AFORS score. Using ROC curves, we calculated a CRP cutoff value of 115 mg/L on postoperative day 2 for AL with a sensitivity of 86% and a negative predictive value of 96%. The TASTY approach was designed to allocate patients with a low risk AFORS score to primary anastomosis with no diverting stoma and high risk AFORS score patients to a diverting stoma, with early closure at 8-14 days, if CRP values and postoperative CT were satisfactory. The TASTY approach was piloted in 122 patients, 48 (39%) were identified as low risk (AFORS score 0-1) and 74 (61%) were considered as high risk (AFORS score 2-6). The AL rate was 10% in the low-risk cohort of patient compared to 23% in the high-risk cohort of patients, p = 0.078 The grade of Clavien-Dindo morbidity was equivalent. The incidence of major LARS was lowest in the no stoma cohort at 3 months (p = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates the feasibility and safety of employing a selective approach to diverting stoma in patients with a low anastomosis following TME surgery for rectal cancer.

Patients' experiences of living with low anterior resection syndrome three to six months after colorectal cancer surgery: A phenomenological study

BACKGROUND

Increased use of sphincter-preserving surgery following colorectal cancer has led to more people living with low anterior resection syndrome (LARS), a disordered bowel function that significantly impacts quality of life. Little is known about how patients experience the first months following sphincter-preserving surgery and having LARS.

OBJECTIVE

To shed light on what it means to live with LARS in the first three to six months after colorectal cancer sphincter-preserving surgery.

METHOD

A qualitative study with a phenomenological approach constitutes the study design. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with five participants from September 2022 to January 2023. The transcribed interviews were analysed using Giorgi's phenomenological method.

RESULTS

Five themes emerged from the analysis: bowel emptying becomes all-consuming and affects both daily life and working life, you hear what they're saying, but don't understand what it means until your body goes through it, low anterior resection syndrome may impact sexual life, leaving feelings of guilt, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are, but rather how one deals with them, and support and follow-up from healthcare professionals, employers, family and friends are crucial for living a good life with LARS.

CONCLUSION

Participants described struggles living with major LARS in the early period following hospital discharge. However, few months later, they had developed strategies enabling them to control their everyday life. Support and follow-up from healthcare professionals, employers, family, and friends were crucial when learning to live with major LARS. Participants expressed desire for a systematic and proactive follow-up from healthcare professionals and contact with peer-support groups.

An Institutional Shift from Routine to Selective Diversion of Low Anastomosis in Robotic TME Surgery for Rectal Cancer Patients Using the KHANS Technique: A Single-Centre Cohort Study

(1) Background: In recent years, there has been a change in practice for diverting stomas in rectal cancer surgery, shifting from routine diverting stomas to a more selective approach. Studies suggest that the benefits of temporary ileostomies do not live up to their risks, such as high-output stomas, stoma dysfunction, and reoperation. (2) Methods: All rectal cancer patients treated with a robotic resection in a single tertiary colorectal centre in the UK from 2013 to 2021 were analysed. In 2015, our unit made a shift to a more selective approach to temporary diverting ileostomies. The cohort was divided into a routine diversion group treated before 2015 and a selective diversion group treated after 2015. Both groups were analysed and compared for short-term outcomes and morbidities. (3) Results: In group A, 63/70 patients (90%) had a diverting stoma compared to 98/135 patients (72.6%) in group B (p = 0.004). There were no significant differences between the groups in anastomotic leakages (11.8% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.312) or other complications (p = 0.117). There were also no significant differences in readmission (3.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.312) or reoperation (3.8% vs. 2.6%, p = 1.000) after stoma closure. After 1 year, 71.6% and 71.9% (p = 1.000) of patients were stoma-free. One major reason for the delay in stoma reversal was the COVID-19 pandemic, which only occurred in group B (0% vs. 22%, p = 0.054). (4) Conclusions: A more selective approach to diverting stomas for robotic rectal cancer patients does not lead to more complications or leaks and can be considered in the treatment of rectal cancer tumours.

Unraveling variations and enhancing prediction of successful sphincter-preserving resection for low rectal cancer: a post hoc analysis of the multicentre LASRE randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Accurate prediction of successful sphincter-preserving resection (SSPR) for low rectal cancer enables peer institutions to scrutinize their own performance and potentially avoid unnecessary permanent colostomy. The aim of this study is to evaluate the variation in SSPR and present the first artificial intelligence (AI) models to predict SSPR in low rectal cancer patients.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective post hoc analysis of a multicenter, non-inferiority randomized clinical trial (LASRE, NCT01899547) conducted in 22 tertiary hospitals across China. A total of 604 patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) followed by radical resection of low rectal cancer were included as the study cohort, which was then split into a training set (67%) and a testing set (33%). The primary end point of this post hoc analysis was SSPR, which was defined as meeting all the following criteria: (1) sphincter-preserving resection; (2) complete or nearly complete TME, (3) a clear CRM (distance between margin and tumour of 1 mm or more), and (4) a clear DRM (distance between margin and tumour of 1 mm or more). Seven AI algorithms, namely, support vector machine (SVM), logistic regression (LR), extreme gradient boosting (XGB), light gradient boosting (LGB), decision tree classifier (DTC), random forest (RF) classifier, and multilayer perceptron (MLP), were employed to construct predictive models for SSPR. Evaluation of accuracy in the independent testing set included measures of discrimination, calibration, and clinical applicability.

RESULTS

The SSPR rate for the entire cohort was 71.9% (434/604 patients). Significant variation in the rate of SSPR, ranging from 37.7 to 94.4%, was observed among the hospitals. The optimal set of selected features included tumour distance from the anal verge before and after CRT, the occurrence of clinical T downstaging, post-CRT weight and clinical N stage measured by magnetic resonance imaging. The seven different AI algorithms were developed and applied to the independent testing set. The LR, LGB, MLP and XGB models showed excellent discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) values of 0.825, 0.819, 0.819 and 0.805, respectively. The DTC, RF and SVM models had acceptable discrimination with AUROC values of 0.797, 0.766 and 0.744, respectively. LR and LGB showed the best discrimination, and all seven AI models had superior overall net benefits within the range of 0.3-0.8 threshold probabilities. Finally, we developed an online calculator based on the LGB model to facilitate clinical use.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of SSPR exhibits substantial variation, and the application of AI models has demonstrated the ability to predict SSPR for low rectal cancers with commendable accuracy.

Comparison of a robotic surgery program for rectal cancer: short- and long-term results from a comparative, retrospective study between two laparoscopic and robotic reference centers

BACKGROUND

It is assumed that robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) may facilitate complex pelvic dissection for rectal cancer compared to the laparoscopic-assisted resection (LAR). The aim of this study was to compare perioperative morbidity, short- and long-term oncologic, and functional outcomes between the RAS and LAR approaches.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2021, all rectal cancers operated on by (LAR) or (RAS) were retrospectively reviewed in two colorectal surgery centers.

RESULTS

A total of 197 patients were included in the study, with 70% in the LAR group and 30% in the RAS group. The tumor location and stage were identical in both groups (not significant = NS). The overall postoperative mortality rate was not significantly different between the two groups. (0% LAR; 0.5% RAS; NS). The postoperative morbidity was similar between the two groups (60% LAR vs 57% RAS; NS). The number of early surgical re-interventions within the first 30 days was similar (10% for the LAR group and 3% for the RAS group; NS). The rate of complete TME was similar (88% for the LAR group and 94% for the RAS group; NS). However, the rate of circumferential R1 was significantly higher in the LAR group (13%) compared to the RAS group (2%) (p = 0.009). The 3-year recurrence rate did not differ between the two groups (77% for both groups; NS). After a mean follow-up of three years, the incidence of anterior resection syndrome was significantly lower in the LAR group compared to the RAS group (54 vs 76%; p = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of a RAS was found to be reliable for oncologic outcomes and morbidity. However, the expected benefits for functional outcomes were not observed. Therefore, the added value of RAS for rectal cancer needs to be reassessed in light of new laparoscopic technologies and patient management options.

Total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer: multicentre study comparing oncological outcomes of robotic, laparoscopic and transanal total mesorectal excision in high-volume centres

BACKGROUND

The routine use of MRI in rectal cancer treatment allows the use of a strict definition for low rectal cancer. This study aimed to compare minimally invasive total mesorectal excision in MRI-defined low rectal cancer in expert laparoscopic, transanal and robotic high-volume centres.

METHODS

All MRI-defined low rectal cancer operated on between 2015 and 2017 in 11 Dutch centres were included. Primary outcomes were: R1 rate, total mesorectal excision quality and 3-year local recurrence and survivals (overall and disease free). Secondary outcomes included conversion rate, complications and whether there was a perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan.

RESULTS

Of 1071 eligible rectal cancers, 633 patients with low rectal cancer were identified. Quality of the total mesorectal excision specimen (P = 0.337), R1 rate (P = 0.107), conversion (P = 0.344), anastomotic leakage rate (P = 0.942), local recurrence (P = 0.809), overall survival (P = 0.436) and disease-free survival (P = 0.347) were comparable among the centres. The laparoscopic centre group had the highest rate of perioperative change in the preoperative treatment plan (10.4%), compared with robotic expert centres (5.2%) and transanal centres (2.1%), P = 0.004. The main reason for this change was stapling difficulty (43%), followed by low tumour location (29%). Multivariable analysis showed that laparoscopic surgery was the only independent risk factor for a change in the preoperative planned procedure, P = 0.024.

CONCLUSION

Centres with expertise in all three minimally invasive total mesorectal excision techniques can achieve good oncological resection in the treatment of MRI-defined low rectal cancer. However, compared with robotic expert centres and transanal centres, patients treated in laparoscopic centres have an increased risk of a change in the preoperative intended procedure due to technical limitations.

Advancing mid-rectal cancer surgery: Unveiling the potential of natural orifice specimen extraction surgery in comparison to conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection

BACKGROUND

Mid-rectal cancer treatment traditionally involves conventional laparoscopic-assisted resection (CLAR). This study aimed to assess the clinical and therapeutic advantages of Natural Orifice Specimen Extraction Surgery (NOSES) over CLAR.

AIMS

To compare the clinical outcomes, intraoperative metrics, postoperative recovery, complications, and long-term prognosis between NOSES and CLAR groups.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A total of 136 patients were analyzed, with 92 undergoing CLAR and 44 undergoing NOSES. Clinical outcomes were evaluated, and propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to control potential biases.

RESULTS

The NOSES group exhibited significant improvements in postoperative recovery, including lower pain scores on days 1, 3, and 5 (p < .001), reduced need for additional analgesics (p = .02), shorter hospital stays (10.8 ± 2.3 vs. 14.2 ± 5.3 days; p < .001), and decreased intraoperative blood loss (48.1 ± 52.7 mL vs. 71.0 ± 55.0 mL; p = .03). Patients undergoing NOSES also reported enhanced satisfaction with postoperative abdominal appearance and better quality of life. Additionally, the NOSES approach resulted in fewer postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

While long-term outcomes (overall survival, disease-free survival, and local recurrence rates) were comparable between the two methods, NOSES demonstrated superior postoperative outcomes compared to CLAR in mid-rectal cancer treatment, while maintaining similar long-term oncological safety. These findings suggest that NOSES could serve as an effective alternative to CLAR without compromising long-term results.

New Onset Geriatric Syndromes and One-year Outcomes Following Elective Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether older adults who develop geriatric syndromes following elective gastrointestinal surgery have poorer 1-year outcomes.

BACKGROUND

Within 10 years, 70% of all cancers will occur in older adults ≥65 years old. The rise in older adults requiring major surgery has brought attention to age-related complications termed geriatric syndromes. However, whether postoperative geriatric syndromes are associated with long-term outcomes is unclear.

METHODS

A population-based retrospective cohort study using the New York State Cancer Registry and the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System was performed including patients >55 years with pathologic stage I-III esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, colon, or rectal cancer who underwent elective resection between 2004 and 2018. Those aged 55 to 64 served as the reference group. The exposure of interest was a geriatric syndrome [fracture, fall, delirium, pressure ulcer, depression, malnutrition, failure to thrive, dehydration, or incontinence (urinary/fecal)] during the surgical admission. Patients with any geriatric syndrome within 1 year of surgery were excluded. Outcomes included incident geriatric syndrome, 1-year days alive and out of the hospital, and 1-year all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

In this study, 37,998 patients with a median age of 71 years without a prior geriatric syndrome were included. Of those 65 years or more, 6.4% developed a geriatric syndrome. Factors associated with an incident geriatric syndrome were age, alcohol/tobacco use, comorbidities, neoadjuvant therapy, ostomies, open surgery, and upper gastrointestinal cancers. An incident geriatric syndrome was associated with a 43% higher risk of 1-year mortality (hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.60). For those aged 65+ discharged alive and not to hospice, a geriatric syndrome was associated with significantly fewer days alive and out of hospital (322 vs 346 days, P < 0.0001). There was an indirect relationship between the number of geriatric syndromes and 1-year mortality and days alive and out of the hospital after adjusting for surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the increase in older adults requiring major surgical intervention, and the establishment of geriatric surgery accreditation programs, these data suggest that morbidity and mortality metrics should be adjusted to accommodate the independent relationship between geriatric syndromes and long-term outcomes.

Assessing Severity of Low Anterior Resection Syndrome After Intersphincteric Resection for Ultralow Rectal Cancer: A Pilot Study Using an Exploratory Instrument

BACKGROUND

The Delphi consensus identified 8 symptoms and 8 consequences as the highest priorities for defining low anterior resection syndrome.

OBJECTIVE

To describe an exploratory scoring instrument correlating the Delphi consensus on low anterior resection syndrome with functional and quality-of-life scores following intersphincteric resection for ultralow rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This was a prospective pilot study. In accordance with the Wexner incontinence score, 5 frequency responses ranging from never (score 0) to always (score 4) were used to measure the severity of symptom- and consequence-specific variables.

SETTINGS

Colorectal surgery referral center.

PATIENTS

Among 161 eligible patients, 137 participants (85%) completed an electronic self-assessment survey regarding function and quality of life at scheduled follow-up, including 3 to 6, 12, and ≥24 months after ileostomy reversal.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Outcome measures included patient-reported severity of the identified priorities, and their correlation with condition-specific quality of life.

RESULTS

The most frequent symptom and consequence were "emptying difficulties" and "dissatisfaction with the bowels," respectively. Aside from "emptying difficulties," the proportions of negative symptom domains increased after reversal. In particular, neither the frequency responses nor the severity scores of "emptying difficulties" differed between groups. The percentages of "always" selection for consequence domains improved at 12-month follow-up, whereas a higher rate was observed at 24 months, except for "toilet dependence" and "dissatisfaction with the bowels." We found significant improvements in the summary score of the Fecal Incontinence Quality-of-Life Scale ( p = 0.04) and our exploratory instrument ( p = 0.009) but not in functional scores measured by traditional questionnaires. Furthermore, the condition-specific quality of life strongly correlated with the Delphi consensus severity score ( rs = -0.73).

LIMITATIONS

Single-institution data and limited sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

The important priorities identified by the Delphi consensus might enable a comprehensive overview and a better assessment of low anterior resection syndrome after intersphincteric resection. See Video Abstract .

EVALE LA GRAVEDAD DEL SNDROME DE RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA DESPUS DE LA RESECCIN INTERESFINTRICA PARA EL CNCER DE RECTO ULTRABAJO UN ESTUDIO PILOTO QUE UTILIZA UN INSTRUMENTO EXPLORATORIO

ANTECEDENTES:El consenso Delphi identificó ocho síntomas y ocho consecuencias como las máximas prioridades para definir el síndrome de resección anterior baja.OBJETIVO:Describir un instrumento de puntuación exploratorio que correlaciona el consenso Delphi sobre el síndrome de resección anterior baja con puntuaciones funcionales y de calidad de vida después de la resección interesfinteriana para el cáncer de recto ultrabajo.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio piloto prospectivo. De acuerdo con la puntuación de incontinencia de Wexner, se utilizaron cinco respuestas de frecuencia que van desde nunca (puntuación 0) hasta siempre (puntuación 4) para medir la gravedad de las variables específicas de los síntomas y las consecuencias.AJUSTES:Centro de referencia de cirugía colorrectal.PACIENTES:Entre 161 pacientes elegibles, 137 (85%) participantes completaron una encuesta electrónica de autoevaluación sobre la función y la calidad de vida en el seguimiento programado, incluidos 3 a 6, 12 y ≥ 24 meses después de la reversión de la ileostomía.MEDIDAS PRINCIPALES DE RESULTADO:Las medidas de resultado incluyeron la gravedad de estas prioridades informada por los pacientes, así como su correlación con la calidad de vida específica de la afección.RESULTADOS:El síntoma y la consecuencia más frecuentes fueron "dificultades para vaciar" e "insatisfacción con las deposiciones", respectivamente. Aparte de las "dificultades de vaciado", las proporciones de dominios de síntomas negativos aumentaron después de la reversión. En particular, tanto las respuestas de frecuencia como las puntuaciones de gravedad de las "dificultades para vaciar" no difirieron entre los grupos. Los porcentajes de "opción siempre" para los dominios de consecuencias mejoraron a los 12 meses de seguimiento, mientras que se observó una tasa más alta a los 24 meses después, excepto para "dependencia del baño" e "insatisfacción con los intestinos". Encontramos mejoras significativas en la puntuación resumida de la Escala de calidad de vida de incontinencia fecal ( p = 0,04) y nuestro instrumento exploratorio ( p = 0,009), pero no en las puntuaciones funcionales medidas con los cuestionarios tradicionales. Además, la calidad de vida específica de la condición se correlacionó fuertemente con la puntuación de gravedad del consenso Delphi (rs = -0,73).LIMITACIONES:Datos de una sola institución y tamaño de muestra limitado.CONCLUSIONES:Las importantes prioridades identificadas por el consenso Delphi podrían permitir una visión global y una mejor evaluación del síndrome de resección anterior baja después de la resección interesfintérica. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Influence of neoadjuvant treatment strategy on perioperative outcomes in locally advanced rectal cancer

AIM

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) in locally advanced rectal cancer facilitates tumour downstaging and complete pathological response (pCR). The goal of neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy (total neoadjuvant chemotherapy, TNT) is to further improve local and systemic control. While some patients forgo surgery, total mesorectal excision (TME) remains the standard of care. While TNT appears to be noninferior to nCRT with respect to short-term oncological outcomes few data exist on perioperative outcomes. Perioperative morbidity including anastomotic leaks is associated with a negative effect on oncological outcomes, probably due to a delay in proceeding to adjuvant therapy. Thus, we aimed to compare conversion rates, rates of sphincter-preserving surgery and anastomosis formation rates in patients undergoing rectal resection after either TNT or standard nCRT.

METHODS

An institutional colorectal oncology database was searched from January 2018 to July 2023. Inclusion criteria comprised patients with histologically confirmed rectal cancer who had undergone neoadjuvant therapy and TME. Exclusion criteria comprised patients with a noncolorectal primary, those operated on emergently or who had local excision only. Outcomes evaluated included rates of conversion to open, sphincter-preserving surgery, anastomosis formation and anastomotic leak.

RESULTS

A total of 119 patients were eligible for inclusion (60 with standard nCRT, 59 with TNT). There were no differences in rates of sphincter preservation or primary anastomosis formation between the groups. However, a significant increase in conversion to open (p = 0.03) and anastomotic leak (p = 0.03) was observed in the TNT cohort.

CONCLUSION

In this series TNT appears to be associated with higher rates of conversion to open surgery and higher anastomotic leak rates. While larger studies will be required to confirm these findings, these factors should be considered alongside oncological benefits when selecting treatment strategies.

Timing of restoration of bowel continuity after decompressing stoma, in left-sided obstructive colon cancer: a nationwide retrospective cohort

BACKGROUND

With the increasing use of decompressing stoma as a bridge to surgery for left-sided obstructive colon cancer (LSOCC), the timing of restoration of bowel continuity (ROBC) is a subject of debate. There is a lack of data on immediate ROBC during elective resection as an alternative for a 3-stage procedure. This study analysed if immediate ROBC during tumour resection is safe and of any benefit for patients who underwent decompressing stoma for LSOCC.

METHODS

In a Dutch nationwide collaborative research project, 3153 patients who underwent resection for LSOCC in 75 hospitals (2009-2016) were identified. Extensive data on disease and procedural characteristics, and outcomes was collected by local collaborators. For this analysis, 332 patients who underwent decompressing stoma followed by curative resection were selected. Immediate ROBC during tumour resection was compared to two no immediate ROBC groups, (1) tumour resection with primary anastomosis (PA) with leaving the decompressing stoma in situ, and (2) tumour resection without PA.

RESULTS

Immediate ROBC was performed in 113 patients (34.0%) and no immediate ROBC in 219 patients [168 with PA (50.6%) and 51 patients without PA (15.4%)]. No differences at baseline between the groups were found for age, ASA score, cT, and cM. Major surgical complications (8.8% immediate ROBC vs. 4.8% PA with decompressing stoma and 7.8% no PA; P =0.37) and mortality (2.7% vs. 2.4% and 0%, respectively; P =0.52) were similar. Immediate ROBC resulted in a shorter time with a stoma (mean 41 vs. 240 and 314 days, respectively; P <0.001), and fewer permanent stomas (7% vs. 21% and 80%, respectively; P <0.001) as compared to PA with a decompressing stoma or no PA.

CONCLUSION

After a decompressing stoma for LSOCC, immediate ROBC during elective resection appears safe, reduces the total time with a stoma and the risk of a permanent stoma.

Association of Frailty With Post-Operative Outcomes of Older Adults Undergoing Elective Ostomy Reversal

BACKGROUND

Ostomy reversal is a common surgical procedure; however, it is not without associated risks. Patient selection for this elective procedure is therefore critically important. Elderly patients represent a growing population and a substantial proportion of patients that present for evaluation after ostomy creation due to the most common etiologies. This study aims to assess the impact of frailty on the outcomes of ostomy reversal among older adults.

METHODS

Patients ≥65 years who underwent ostomy reversal from 2015 to 2019 were identified in the NSQIP database. Frailty was calculated using the 5-item Modified Frailty Index (MFI). Multivariate regression was performed to evaluate the association of frailty with post-operative 30-day mortality, 30-day serious complications, discharge to a facility, and 30-day readmission.

RESULTS

A total of 13,053 patients were included, of which 18.7% were frail (MFI ≥ 2). Patients who underwent colostomy reversal had higher rates of serious complications (P < .0001) and discharge to facility (P < .0001) compared to other reversals. In multivariate analysis, frailty was associated with increased odds of serious complications (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.31-1.77), discharge to facility (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.79-2.57), and readmission (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.04-1.46), but not mortality. Frail patients had predicted probabilities 1.4 times higher for serious complications and 1.7-2.2 times greater for discharge to facility than non-frail patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older adults undergoing elective ostomy reversal, frailty is independently associated with increased odds of 30-day serious complications, discharge to facility, and 30-day readmission. As a potentially modifiable risk factor, identification of frailty offers the opportunity for shared decision-making and prehabilitation.

Optimisation of Organ Preservation treatment strategies in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy: Additional contact X-ray brachytherapy versus eXtending the observation period and local excision (OPAXX) - protocol for two multicentre, parallel, single-arm, phase II studies

INTRODUCTION

Standard treatment for patients with intermediate or locally advanced rectal cancer is (chemo)radiotherapy followed by total mesorectal excision (TME) surgery. In recent years, organ preservation aiming at improving quality of life has been explored. Patients with a complete clinical response to (chemo)radiotherapy can be managed safely with a watch-and-wait approach. However, the optimal organ-preserving treatment strategy for patients with a good, but not complete clinical response remains unclear. The aim of the OPAXX study is to determine the rate of organ preservation that can be achieved in patients with rectal cancer with a good clinical response after neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy by additional local treatment options.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The OPAXX study is a Dutch multicentre study that investigates the efficacy of two additional local treatments aiming at organ preservation in patients with a good, but not complete response to neoadjuvant treatment (ie near-complete response or a small residual tumour mass <3 cm). The sample size will be 168 patients in total. Patients will be randomised (1:1) between two parallel single-arm phase II studies: study arm 1 involves additional contact X-ray brachytherapy (an intraluminal radiation boost), while in study arm 2 the observation period is extended followed by a second response evaluation and optional transanal local excision. The primary endpoint of the study is the rate of successful organ preservation at 1 year following randomisation. Secondary endpoints include toxicity, morbidity, oncological and functional outcomes at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. Finally, an observational cohort study for patients who are not eligible for randomisation is conducted.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial protocol has been approved by the medical ethics committee of the Netherlands Cancer Institute (METC20.1276/M20PAX). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The trial results will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05772923.

Total neoadjuvant therapy followed by a watch-and-wait strategy for patients with rectal cancer (TOWARd): protocol for single-arm phase II/III confirmatory trial (JCOG2010)

BACKGROUND

Radical surgery is the standard treatment for rectal cancer, but can impact quality of life. Recently, the concept of total neoadjuvant therapy with a watch-and-wait strategy has been proposed in which patients with a cCR after total neoadjuvant therapy do not proceed to surgery. However, most investigations of a watch-and-wait strategy have reported cases where cCR was achieved coincidentally via total neoadjuvant therapy. The aim is to assess whether total neoadjuvant therapy is effective in early-stage rectal cancer in patients that achieve cCR and are offered a watch-and-wait strategy.

METHODS

JCOG2010 (TOWARd) is a multi-institutional, single-arm phase II/III confirmatory investigation of the safety and efficacy of total neoadjuvant therapy followed by a watch-and-wait strategy for rectal cancer. Key eligibility criteria include cT2-3 N0 M0 rectal adenocarcinoma, tumour diameter less than or equal to 5 cm, age 18-75 years, performance status 0-1, and no history of pelvic irradiation or rectal surgery. Total neoadjuvant therapy involves neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (capecitabine and radiotherapy: 45 Gy/25 fractions to the whole pelvis plus boost of 5.4 Gy/3 fractions to the primary tumour) followed by consolidation chemotherapy (four cycles of capecitabine/oxaliplatin). Patients will be re-staged every 8 weeks after total neoadjuvant therapy, and those who achieve cCR will undergo a watch-and-wait strategy, those with near complete response will undergo a watch-and-wait strategy or local resection, and those with an incomplete response will undergo radical surgery. The primary endpoint is the cCR rate in phase II and 5-year overall survival in phase III. Secondary endpoints include postoperative anal, urinary, and sexual function. A total of 105 patients (phase II, 40 patients; phase III, 65 patients) will be enrolled over 3.5 years.

CONCLUSION

This trial will determine whether total neoadjuvant therapy and a watch-and-wait strategy is an effective alternative to radical surgery for early-stage rectal cancer in patients with cT2-3 N0 M0 and tumour size less than or equal to 5 cm.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

jRCTs031220288 (https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs031220288).

Validated Pretreatment Prediction Models for Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy in Patients with Rectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal

Pretreatment response prediction is crucial to select those patients with rectal cancer who will benefit from organ preservation strategies following (intensified) neoadjuvant therapy and to avoid unnecessary toxicity in those who will not. The combination of individual predictors in multivariable prediction models might improve predictive accuracy. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and critically appraise validated pretreatment prediction models (other than radiomics-based models or image-based deep learning models) for response to neoadjuvant therapy in patients with rectal cancer and provide evidence-based recommendations for future research. MEDLINE via Ovid, Embase.com, and Scopus were searched for eligible studies published up to November 2022. A total of 5006 studies were screened and 16 were included for data extraction and risk of bias assessment using Prediction model Risk Of Bias Assessment Tool (PROBAST). All selected models were unique and grouped into five predictor categories: clinical, combined, genetics, metabolites, and pathology. Studies generally included patients with intermediate or advanced tumor stages who were treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Evaluated outcomes were pathological complete response and pathological tumor response. All studies were considered to have a high risk of bias and none of the models were externally validated in an independent study. Discriminative performances, estimated with the area under the curve (AUC), ranged per predictor category from 0.60 to 0.70 (clinical), 0.78 to 0.81 (combined), 0.66 to 0.91 (genetics), 0.54 to 0.80 (metabolites), and 0.71 to 0.91 (pathology). Model calibration outcomes were reported in five studies. Two collagen feature-based models showed the best predictive performance (AUCs 0.83-0.91 and good calibration). In conclusion, some pretreatment models for response prediction in rectal cancer show encouraging predictive potential but, given the high risk of bias in these studies, their value should be evaluated in future, well-designed studies.

Local versus radical surgery for early rectal cancer with or without neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

Total mesorectal excision is the standard of care for stage I rectal cancer. Despite major advances and increasing enthusiasm for modern endoscopic local excision (LE), uncertainty remains regarding its oncologic equivalence and safety relative to radical resection (RR).

OBJECTIVES

To assess the oncologic, operative, and functional outcomes of modern endoscopic LE compared to RR surgery in adults with stage I rectal cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded (1900 to present), four trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN registry, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials database), two thesis and proceedings databases, and relevant scientific societies' publications in February 2022. We performed handsearching and reference checking and contacted study authors of ongoing trials to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in people with stage I rectal cancer comparing any modern LE techniques to any RR techniques with or without the use of neo/adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methodological procedures. We calculated hazard ratios (HR) and standard errors for time-to-event data and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes, using generic inverse variance and random-effects methods. We regrouped surgical complications from the included studies into major and minor according to the standard Clavien-Dindo classification. We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE framework.

MAIN RESULTS

Four RCTs were included in data synthesis with a combined total of 266 participants with stage I rectal cancer (T1-2N0M0), if not stated otherwise. Surgery was performed in university hospital settings. The mean age of participants was above 60, and median follow-up ranged from 17.5 months to 9.6 years. Regarding the use of co-interventions, one study used neoadjuvant CRT in all participants (T2 cancers); one study used short-course radiotherapy in the LE group (T1-T2 cancers); one study used adjuvant CRT selectively in high-risk patients undergoing RR (T1-T2 cancers); and the fourth study did not use any CRT (T1 cancers). We assessed the overall risk of bias as high for oncologic and morbidity outcomes across studies. All studies had at least one key domain with a high risk of bias. None of the studies reported separate outcomes for T1 versus T2 or for high-risk features. Low-certainty evidence suggests that RR may result in an improvement in disease-free survival compared to LE (3 trials, 212 participants; HR 1.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 4.24). This would translate into a three-year disease-recurrence risk of 27% (95% CI 14 to 50%) versus 15% after LE and RR, respectively. Regarding sphincter function, only one study provided objective results and reported short-term deterioration in stool frequency, flatulence, incontinence, abdominal pain, and embarrassment about bowel function in the RR group. At three years, the LE group had superiority in overall stool frequency, embarrassment about bowel function, and diarrhea. Local excision may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR (3 trials, 207 participants; HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.60 to 3.33; very low-certainty evidence). We did not pool studies for local recurrence, but the included studies individually reported comparable local recurrence rates for LE and RR (low-certainty evidence). It is unclear if the risk of major postoperative complications may be lower with LE compared with RR (risk ratio 0.53, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.28; low-certainty evidence; corresponding to 5.8% (95% CI 2.4% to 14.1%) risk for LE versus 11% for RR). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that the risk of minor postoperative complications is probably lower after LE (risk ratio 0.48, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.85); corresponding to an absolute risk of 14% (95% CI 8% to 26%) for LE compared to 30.1% for RR. One study reported an 11% rate of temporary stoma after LE versus 82% in the RR group. Another study reported a 46% rate of temporary or permanent stomas after RR and none after LE. The evidence is uncertain about the effect of LE compared with RR on quality of life. Only one study reported standard quality of life function, in favor of LE, with a 90% or greater probability of superiority in overall quality of life, role, social, and emotional functions, body image, and health anxiety. Other studies reported a significantly shorter postoperative period to oral intake, bowel movement, and off-bed activities in the LE group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low-certainty evidence, LE may decrease disease-free survival in early rectal cancer. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that LE may have little to no effect on cancer-related survival compared to RR for the treatment of stage I rectal cancer. Based on low-certainty evidence, it is unclear if LE may have a lower major complication rate, but probably causes a large reduction in minor complication rate. Limited data based on one study suggest better sphincter function, quality of life, or genitourinary function after LE. Limitations exist with respect to the applicability of these findings. We identified only four eligible studies with a low number of total participants, subjecting the results to imprecision. Risk of bias had a serious impact on the quality of evidence. More RCTs are needed to answer our review question with greater certainty and to compare local and distant metastasis rates. Data on important patient outcomes such as sphincter function and quality of life are very limited. Results of currently ongoing trials will likely impact the results of this review. Future trials should accurately report and compare outcomes according to the stage and high-risk features of rectal tumors, and evaluate quality of life, sphincter, and genitourinary outcomes. The role of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy as an emerging co-intervention for improving oncologic outcomes after LE needs to be further defined.

What can surgeons do to prevent job leave soon after cancer diagnosis? A brief report on colorectal cancer survivors in Japan

PURPOSE

Colorectal cancer is one of the most diagnosed cancers in Japan and the number of cancer survivors has increased. Work-related issues of cancer survivors have been investigated in relation to occupational health, and sufficient evidence in clinical practice is needed to support this. This study aimed to obtain the relevant information, intending to support the employment of patients with colorectal cancer for clinical settings.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective, multicenter cohort study, which included patients who underwent surgery with clinical stage I-III colorectal cancer. An electronic survey was used at the time of hospital admission to collect the patients' occupational information, including job resignation soon after cancer diagnosis. A cross-sectional analysis was performed to evaluate the patients' employment situations.

RESULTS

Of 129 eligible patients, 46 (36%) were female. Thirty-nine (30%) were self-employed and 72 (56%) worked at small-sized workplaces, which are not obliged to have occupational physicians. Most patients (89%) expressed their desire to return to work, but eight patients (6%) left their jobs soon after being diagnosed with colorectal cancer before undergoing surgery for several reasons stemming from worries about future treatment and its consequences. Multivariable analyses indicated that nonregular employees and the self-employed might be at a disadvantage in keeping their job at diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Surgeons should address work-related issues for survivorship, which begins at cancer diagnosis and, when available, collaborate with occupational physicians while being mindful that patients working at smaller companies do not have immediate access to occupational physicians.

Selecting a TNT Schedule in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: Can We Predict Who Actually Benefits?

Many consider the standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) to be preoperative chemoradiotherapy, radical surgery involving a total mesorectal excision, and post-operative adjuvant chemotherapy based on the pathology of the specimen. The poor impact on distant control is a major limitation of this strategy, with metastasis rates remaining in the 25-35% range and recovery after radical surgery leading to reluctance with prescription and inconsistent patient compliance with adjuvant chemotherapy. A second limitation is the low rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) (around 10-15%) despite multiple efforts to potentiate preoperative chemoradiation regimens, which in turn means it is less effective at achieving non-operative management (NOM). Total neoadjuvant treatment (TNT) is a pragmatic approach to solving these problems by introducing systemic chemotherapy at an early timepoint. Enthusiasm for delivering TNT for patients with LARC is increasing in light of the results of published randomized phase III trials, which show a doubling of the pCR rate and a significant reduction in the risk of subsequent metastases. However, there has been no demonstrated improvement in quality of life or overall survival. A plethora of potential chemotherapy schedules are available around the radiotherapy component, which include preoperative induction or consolidation with a range of options (FOLFOXIRI, FOLFOX, or CAPEOX,) and a varying duration of 6-18 weeks, prior to long course chemoradiation (LCCRT) or consolidation NACT following short-course preoperative radiation therapy (SCPRT) using 5 × 5 Gy or LCCRT using 45-60 Gy, respectively. The need to maintain optimal local control is a further important factor, and preliminary data appear to indicate that the RT schedule remains a crucial issue, especially in more advanced tumors, i.e., mesorectal fascia (MRF) invasion. Thus, there is no consensus as to the optimum combination, sequence, or duration of TNT. The selection of patients most likely to benefit is challenging, as clear-cut criteria to individuate patients benefiting from TNT are lacking. In this narrative review, we examine if there are any necessary or sufficient criteria for the use of TNT. We explore potential selection for the individual and their concerns with a generalized use of this strategy.

Tranexamic acid use in meningioma surgery - A systematic review and meta-analysis

Tranexamic Acid (TXA) has been used in medical and surgical practice to reduce haemorrhage. The aim of this review was to evaluate the effect of TXA use on intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of meningioma surgery. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA statement and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021292157). Six databases were searched up to November 2021 for phase 2-4 control trials or cohort studies, in the English language, examining TXA use during meningioma surgery. Studies ran outside of dedicated neurosurgical departments or centres were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. Random effects meta-analysis were performed to delineate differences in operative and postoperative outcomes. Four studies (281 patients) were included. TXA use significantly reduced intraoperative blood loss (mean difference 315.7 mls [95% confidence interval [CI] -532.8, -98.5]). Factors not affected by TXA use were transfusion requirement (odds ratio = 0.52; 95% CI 0.27, 0.98), operation time (mean difference = -0.2 h; 95% CI -0.8, 0.4), postoperative seizures (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.88; 95% CI 0.31, 2.53), hospital stay (mean difference = -1.2; 95% CI -3.4, 0.9) and disability after surgery (OR = 0.50; 95% CI 0.23, 1.06). The key limitations of this review were the small sample size, limited data for secondary outcomes and a lack of standardised method for measuring blood loss. TXA use reduces blood loss in meningioma surgery, but not transfusion requirement or postoperative complications. Larger trials are required to investigate the impact of TXA on patient-reported postoperative outcomes.

Information and counselling needs of patients with major low anterior resection syndrome: A qualitative study

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The aim was to explore the information and counselling needs of rectal cancer survivors confronted with major low anterior resection syndrome.

BACKGROUND

Rectal cancer survivors are often confronted with bowel problems after surgery. This is called low anterior resection syndrome. Patients are unsure what to expect after treatment and healthcare professionals often underestimate the impact of low anterior resection syndrome on patients' lives.

DESIGN

A qualitative study with a grounded theory approach was conducted.

METHODS

Patients were recruited between 2017 and 2019 in three hospitals, and a call was distributed in two patients' organisations. Semi-structured interviews with patients confronted with major low anterior resection syndrome were performed. An iterative process between data collection and data analysis was used. Data analysis was done using the constant comparative method, and investigators' triangulation was applied. Qualitative data were reported following COREQ guidelines. The study was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04896879.

RESULTS

A total of 28 patients were interviewed until theoretical data saturation. Before surgery patients' need for information varied according to their individual coping mechanisms. Some patients required information before surgery, while others considered this too overwhelming. When confronted with LARS, patients desired that healthcare professionals recognised its impact and clarified its expected evolution. A proactive counselling with an easy accessible and approachable healthcare professional was beneficial.

CONCLUSION

Patients expressed several needs regarding the information before rectal cancer surgery and counselling of low anterior resection syndrome after surgery.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Better knowledge and understanding of major low anterior resection syndrome and its challenges by healthcare professionals are crucial. Especially the impact on quality of life is significant for patients and underestimated by healthcare professionals. Information before surgery and counselling when confronted with major low anterior resection syndrome should be optimised and tailored to patients' needs.

Cost Drivers of Elective Colon and Rectal Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis

BACKGROUND

Colorectal surgery is expensive. Few studies have evaluated complications as an economic cost driver, and there is little evidence comparing multiple cost drivers of colorectal surgery to determine the most effective means of reducing total cost.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the effects of surgical techniques, use of enhanced recovery protocols, and presence or absence of complications on the total cost of hospitalization for elective colorectal surgery.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort analysis using data from 2011 to 2018 was performed. The primary end point was a mean cost per hospitalization. The cost was compared between patients who experienced minimally invasive versus open surgeries, enhanced recovery after surgery protocols versus not, and complications versus none.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted at a university-affiliated teaching hospital in the Northeastern United States.

PATIENTS

Adult patients who have undergone elective colorectal surgery were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome for this study was the mean cost per hospitalization calculated using inpatient cost based on the total cost of the episode of care.

RESULTS

A total of 1039 patients met the criteria for inclusion. The average cost of all hospitalizations was $19,801. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that enhanced recovery protocols substantially lowered the cost of care by $6392 ( p = 0.001), whereas complications increased the cost of care by $16,780 per episode ( p < 0.001). When complications occurred, enhanced recovery protocols reduced the cost by $17,963 ( p = 0.010).

LIMITATIONS

This retrospective cohort study performed at a single institution has inherent limitations, including confounding and selection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

For elective colorectal surgery, complications are associated with significantly increased costs. Avoiding complications should be a priority to reduce costs. Enhanced recovery protocols are associated with significantly reduced costs. Surgeons should focus future research efforts on improving protocols and processes that decrease postoperative complications to improve patient outcomes and to reduce costs associated with elective colorectal hospitalizations. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B927 .

FACTORES DE COSTO DE LA CIRUGA ELECTIVA DE COLON Y RECTO UN ANLISIS DE COHORTE RETROSPECTIVE

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía colorrectal es costosa. Pocos estudios han examinado las complicaciones como un factor de costo económico, y hay poca evidencia que compare múltiples factores de costo de la cirugía colorrectal para determinar los medios más efectivos para reducir el costo total.OBJETIVO:Este estudio tiene como objetivo determinar los efectos de las técnicas quirúrgicas, el uso de protocolos de enhanced recovery y la presencia o ausencia de complicaciones en el costo total de hospitalización por cirugía colorrectal electiva.DISEÑO:Se realizó un análisis retrospectivo de cohortes utilizando data del 2011-2018. El punto principal fue el costo medio por hospitalización. Se comparó el costo entre los pacientes que experimentaron: cirugías mínimamente invasivas versus abiertas, protocolos de enhanced recovery después de la cirugía versus no, y complicaciones versus no.FUENTE DE DATOS:Se consultó la base de datos financiera y contable del hospital y el registro médico electrónico para la obtencion de datos.ENTORNO CLINICO:Este estudio se realizó en un hospital docente afiliado a una universidad en el noreste de los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Se incluyeron pacientes adultos sometidos a cirugía colorrectal electiva.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:El resultado principal de este estudio fue el costo medio por hospitalización calculado utilizando el costo de hospitalización basado en el costo total del episodio de atención.RESULTADOS:Un total de 1.039 pacientes cumplieron los criterios de inclusión. El costo promedio de todas las hospitalizaciones fue de $19801. El análisis multivariante demostró que los protocolos de enhanced recovery redujeron sustancialmente el costo de la atención en $6392 ( p = 0,001), mientras que las complicaciones aumentaron el costo en $16780 por episodio ( p < 0,001). Cuando ocurrieron complicaciones, los protocolos de enhanced recovery redujeron el costo en $17963 ( p = 0,010).LIMITACIONES:Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo realizado en una sola institución y tiene limitaciones inherentes que incluyen confusión y sesgo de selección.CONCLUSIONES:Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B927 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Morbidity and oncological outcomes after intersphincteric resection of the rectum for low-lying rectal cancer: experience of a single center in a lower-middle-income country

BACKGROUND

Intersphincteric resection (ISR) of the rectum for low-lying rectal cancer with colo-anal anastomosis was introduced years ago, allowing for bowel continuity, and avoiding permanent stomas. The colorectal unit of Korle Bu Teaching Hospital adopted this procedure in 2014 when indicated, for the management of rectal cancers, where hitherto, abdominoperineal resection of the rectum with a permanent stoma was indicated. This study aimed to assess morbidity, mortality, and oncological outcomes associated with ISR of the rectum and determine the factors contributing to these.

METHODS

This was an observational study from prospectively stored data. All patients who underwent intersphincteric resection of the rectum due to low-lying rectal cancer from July 2014 to June 2021 were included in the study, and their records were assessed for intra-operative and 30-day postoperative complications, as well as mortality and their related risk factors and their oncological outcomes in terms of local recurrence at one year.

RESULTS

102 patients were included in this analysis. Six percent (6/102) of patients had intra-operative complications, including bleeding, and 41% (42/102) had 30-day postoperative complications, which were associated with pelvic side wall attachment of tumor and intra-op complications. Mortality risk was 12.7% (13/102) in the early postoperative period, and nine patients had a local recurrence within the first year of surgery.

CONCLUSION

There is a high risk of early postoperative morbidity and mortality after intersphincteric resection of the rectum in our setting. The oncological outcomes are favorable in a population that abhors a permanent colostomy.

Extraction Site in Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery

The widespread adoption of minimally invasive colorectal surgery has led to improved patient recovery and outcomes. Specimen extraction sites remain a major source of pain and potential postoperative morbidity. Careful selection of the extraction site incision may allow surgeons to decrease postoperative pain, infectious complications, or rates of hernia formation. Options include midline, paramedian, transverse, Pfannenstiel, and natural orifice sites. Patient, disease, and surgeon-related factors should all be considered when choosing a site. This article will review different options for specimen extraction sites.

Interprofessional perspectives on care for patients with low anterior resection syndrome: A qualitative study

AIM

Many patients are confronted with low anterior resection syndrome after rectal surgery. The perspectives of both healthcare professionals and patients on the impact of bowel problems may differ. This study aimed to explore experiences of healthcare professionals on how to provide, organise and optimise care for patients with low anterior resection syndrome from an interprofessional perspective.

METHODS

An explorative qualitative design was used. Healthcare professionals were recruited in October 2018 in one general teaching hospital and one university hospital. Twenty one healthcare professionals from different professions caring for patients with low anterior resection syndrome were included in three focus group interviews.

RESULTS

Healthcare professionals confirmed a lack of focus on patients who are confronted with low anterior resection syndrome and stated a need for a standardised approach of care. Additionally, three levels for care optimization emerged from the data: information before surgery with strong emphasis on the timing of informing, counselling of patients when confronted with low anterior resection syndrome and organisation of care.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare professionals find it important to adopt the moment and amount of information to the coping mechanism and timing of the trajectory. Counselling and follow-up of patients with LARS should be organised proactively and should not remain restricted to pharmacological and nutritional advice. A possible strategy is to develop and implement late effects nurse-led clinics coordinated by the clinical nurse specialist.

Selected stage IV rectal cancer patients managed by the watch-and-wait approach after pelvic radiotherapy: a good alternative to total mesorectal excision surgery?

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical and oncological outcome of a selected group of stage IV rectal cancer patients managed by the watch-and-wait approach following a (near-)complete response of the primary rectal tumour after radiotherapy.

METHOD

Patients registered in the Dutch watch-and-wait registry since 2004 were selected when diagnosed with synchronous stage IV rectal cancer. Data on patient characteristics, treatment details, follow-up and survival were collected. The 2-year local regrowth rate, organ-preservation rate, colostomy-free rate, metastatic progression-free rate and 2- and 5-year overall survival were analysed.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up period of 35 months, local regrowth was observed in 17 patients (40.5%). Nine patients underwent subsequent total mesorectal excision, resulting in a permanent colostomy in four patients. The 2-year local regrowth rate was 39.9%, the 2-year organ-preservation rate was 77.1%, the 2-year colostomy-free rate was 88.1%, and the 2-year metastatic progression-free rate was 46.7%. The 2- and 5-year overall survival rates were 92.0% and 67.5%.

CONCLUSION

The watch-and-wait approach can be considered as an alternative to total mesorectal excision in a selected group of stage IV rectal cancer patients with a (near-)complete response following pelvic radiotherapy. Despite a relatively high regrowth rate, total mesorectal excision and a permanent colostomy can be avoided in the majority of these patients.

Minimally Invasive Endoscopic and Surgical Management of Rectal Neoplasia

Rectal cancer demonstrates a characteristic natural history in which benign rectal neoplasia precedes malignancy. The worldwide burden of rectal cancer is significant, with rectal cancer accounting for one-third of colorectal cancer cases annually. The importance of early detection and successful management is essential in decreasing its clinical burden. Minimally invasive treatment of rectal neoplasia has evolved over the past several decades, which has led to reduced local recurrence rates and improved survival outcomes. The approach to diagnosis, staging, and selection of appropriate treatment modalities is a multidisciplinary effort combining interventional endoscopy, surgery, and radiology tools. This review examines the currently available minimally invasive endoscopic and surgical management options of rectal neoplasia.

Team Members and Patients’ Views on Cost-effectiveness of (Integrated) Clinical Pathway

BACKGROUND: Integrated clinical pathways (ICPs), which have particularly enhanced existing clinical pathways (CPs) through the work of multifunctional teams, have become an important tool to enable informed decision-making and provide more efficient, cost-effective, and value-based care. AIM: In the absence of studies on the cost-effectiveness of ICPs, the aim of this study was to determine the opinion of team members treating patients with total hip arthroplasty and their patients on the practice of cost-effectiveness of the existing CP and ICP that might be introduced in the future. METHODS: A mixed descriptive quantitative and qualitative approach was used. A survey of 61 team members of CP for total hip arthroplasty was conducted, as well as in-depth interviews (n = 12) and focus groups (n = 11). In addition, in-depth interviews were performed with 20 patients who had undergone total hip arthroplasty at CP in a typical Slovenian general hospital. RESULTS: The results showed that participants occasionally prioritized cost-effectiveness over quality of health care. They frequently used CP to reduce the cost and time of patient care. Nurses with secondary education were statistically significantly more likely to prioritize cost-effectiveness of health care over quality of health care than nurses with higher education, physicians, and others. Team members and patients evaluated positively the cost-effectiveness of ICP for total hip arthroplasty, but patients also pointed out that staff, especially nurse had too little contact with patients. CONCLUSION: Both team members treating patients with total hip arthroplasty and their patients have a positive attitude toward the cost-effectiveness of ICP. The nursing staff has too little contact with the patients due to staff shortages.

Improving the time to ileostomy closure following an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the UK

AIM

Delayed closure of ileostomy following an anterior resection for rectal cancer in the UK is common. The aims of this study were (i) to investigate the variation in patient pathways between hospitals, (ii) to identify the key learning points from units with the shortest time to closure and (iii) to develop guidance for a pathway to minimize delay in ileostomy closure.

METHOD

This was a mixed methods study. Thirty-eight colorectal units in the UK completed a short online survey. Nine colorectal units in Wales filled in an additional, expanded version of the survey. Semi-structured interviews were performed with clinicians from the six best performing units in terms of timely ileostomy closure. The optimal pathway suggested is based on the best evidence available and the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland guidelines.

RESULTS

Qualitative analysis revealed that 5% of units (n = 2) have a local target time for ileostomy closure. Of all units, 90% (n = 34) would consider implementing a pathway if guidelines were developed. In-depth interviews highlighted the importance of a multidisciplinary approach, a dedicated coordinator to facilitate timely booking, and consensus on whether closure should be performed before or after adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of national guidance in timing of contrast studies and ileostomy closure. Key aspects to consider are better information at consent regarding stoma closure timing, a dedicated person to track patients and the planning of contrast studies at discharge from initial surgery. With a dedicated approach closure of ileostomy within 10-12 weeks is feasible for most units.

The trajectory of hope and loneliness in rectal cancer survivors with major low anterior resection syndrome: A qualitative study

PURPOSE

Rectal cancer survivors are often confronted with long-term bowel function impairment, called low anterior resection syndrome. This has a large impact on patients' lives. The aim was to explore the experiences of patients with major low anterior resection syndrome with a specific focus on hope and loneliness.

METHODS

A grounded theory approach was used. Individual semi-structured interviews (n = 28) were performed between 2017 and 2019. Patients were recruited in three hospitals and a call was distributed in two patients' organizations. During data analysis, the constant comparative method and investigators' triangulation was used.

RESULTS

Hope was important at different stages in the trajectory. After treatment patients hoped to pick up their previous life. Confrontation with low anterior resection syndrome was unexpected and patients hoped to manage it through trial and error. They lost hope if further improvement was absent. At that turning point some tried to accept the new lifestyle, others pushed their boundaries and some opted for a permanent stoma. Loneliness presented itself in several layers. Patients experience loneliness due being toilet-bound, changes in their lives and activities outside their homes and the impact on their family life.

CONCLUSION

Assessment of the impact on patients' lives and tailored counselling is possible if healthcare professionals gain more insight into the different layers of loneliness and where the patient is located in the trajectory of hope.

Influence of Minimally Invasive Resection Technique on Sphincter Preservation and Short-term Outcome in Low Rectal Cancer in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Transanal and robotic-assisted total mesorectal excision are techniques that can potentially overcome challenges encountered with a pure laparoscopic approach in patients with rectal cancer.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the proportion and predictive factors of restorative procedures and subsequent short-term outcomes of 3 minimally invasive techniques to treat low rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This is a nationwide observational comparative registry study.

SETTINGS

Patients with rectal cancer were selected from the mandatory Dutch ColoRectal Audit.

PATIENTS

Patients with low rectal cancer (≤5 cm) who underwent curative minimally invasive total mesorectal excision between 2015 and 2018 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were the proportion of restorative procedure, positive circumferential resection margin, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 3466 patients were included for analysis, of which 33% underwent a restorative procedure. Resections were performed laparoscopically in 2845 patients, transanally in 448 patients, and were robot-assisted in 173 patients, with a proportion of restorative procedures of 28%, 66%, and 40%. The transanal approach was independently associated with a restorative procedure (OR, 4.11; 95% CI, 3.21-5.26; p < 0.001). Independent risk factors for a nonrestorative procedure, irrespective of the surgical technique, were age >75 years, ASA physical status ≥3, BMI >30, history of abdominal surgery, clinical T4-stage, mesorectal fascia ≤1 mm, neoadjuvant therapy, and having a procedure in 2015 to 2016 versus 2017 to 2018. The circumferential resection margin involvement was similar for all 3 groups (5.4%, 5.1%, and 5.1%). Short-term postoperative complications were less favorable for the newer techniques than for the laparoscopic approach.

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited because of the registry's variables and different group sizes.

CONCLUSION

Patients with low rectal cancer in the Netherlands are more likely to receive a restorative procedure with a transanal approach, compared with a laparoscopic or robotic procedure. Short-term oncological outcomes are comparable between the 3 minimally invasive techniques. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B608.

INFLUENCIA DE LA TCNICA DE RESECCIN MINIMAMENTE INVASIVA CON PRESERVACIN DE ESFNTERES EN LA RESOLUCIN A CORTO PLAZO EN CANCER DE TERCIO INFERIOR DE RECTO EN LOS PASES BAJOS

ANTECEDENTES:La excisión mesorrectal transanal y asistida por robot son técnicas que potencialmente pueden superar algunos obstáculos que podemos encontrar en un abordaje exclusivamente laparoscópico en pacientes con cáncer de recto.OBJECTIVOS:El objetivo de este estudio es evaluar la proporción y los factores de predicción positivos de los procedimientos restauradores y los resultados subsecuentes a corto plazo de tres técnicas mínimamente invasivas para tratar el cáncer de tercio inferior de recto.DISEÑO:Es un estudio comparativo observacional del registro nacional.ESCENARIO:Pacientes con cáncer de recto seleccionados del Registro Oficial de la Auditoría Holandesa Colo-rectal.PACIENTGES:Pacientes con cáncer de tercio inferior de recto (≤5 centimetros) sometidos a excision mesorrectal total mínimamente invasiva curativa.PRINCIPALES PARAMETROS DE EFECTIVIDAD:Proporción de procedimientos restauradores, margen de resección circunferencial positivo y complicaciones postoperatorias.RESULTADOS:Se incluyeron un total de 3,466 pacientes para análisis, de los cuales 33% fueron sometidos a procedimiento restaurador. Las resecciones fueron laparoscópica en 2,845 pacientes, transanal en 448 y asistidas por robot en 173, con una proporción de procedimientos restauradores en 28%, 66% y 40% respectivamente. El abordaje transanal se correlacionó en forma independiente con el procedimiento restaurador (OR 4.11; 95% CI 4.11; 95% CI 3.21-5.26; p<0.001). Los factores de riesgo independientes para un procedimiento no restaurador, sin tomar en cuenta la técnica quirúrgica fueron: edad >75, American Society of Anesthesiologist ≥3, índice de masa corporal >30, antecedente de cirugía abdominal, Estadio clínico T4, fascia mesorrectal ≤1 millimetro, terapia neoadyuvante y haber sido sometido al procedimiento en 2015-2016 y no en 2017-2018. El margen circunferencial de resección involucrado fue similar para los tres grupos (5.4%, 5.1% y 5.1%). Las complicaciones postquirúrgicas a corto plazo fueron menos favorables para las técnicas nuevas comparadas con el abordaje laparoscópico.LIMTANTES:El estudio tiene la limitación de las variables dependientes del registro y la diferencia entre el número de pacientes en cada grupo.CONCLUSION:Los pacientes con cáncer de tercio inferior de recto en Holanda se tratan con mayor frecuencia mediante un procedimiento restaurador transanal en comparación con los abordajes laparoscópico o robótico. Los resultados favorables desde el punto de vista oncológico a corto plazo son comparables entre las tres técnicas de invasión mínima. Consulte Video Resumenhttp://links.lww.com/DCR/B608.

Experiences and needs of patients with rectal cancer confronted with bowel problems after stoma reversal: A systematic review and thematic-synthesis

PURPOSE

After the reversal of the temporary stoma, rectal cancer survivors are often confronted with bowel complaints largely impacting on their quality of life. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise the experiences and needs of patients with rectal cancer confronted with bowel problems after stoma reversal.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed through Pubmed, CINAHL and Web of Science. Only studies with a qualitative design were included in this review. Quality assessment was done by the critical appraisal skill programme (CASP) Qualitative Studies Checklist. A thematic-synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

Of 2713 identified papers, 10 were included in this systematic review. Two general themes were identified: 'experiences and needs about bowel function before surgery' and 'experiences and needs afterwards'. Before restoration of continuity patients had to cope with the temporary stoma, and they felt uncertain about what to expect. Patients indicated that the timing of providing information was crucial but varied. Bowel problems after surgery had a physical and emotional impact on patients' family life. They were also confronted with shame and stigma. Patients were happy to be alive and cancer free but were hopeful that the bowel problems would resolve. They used several strategies to manage and cope with these symptoms. Peers and healthcare professionals proved valuable resources of support.

CONCLUSION

Rectal cancer survivors experience ongoing bowel problems after treatment. Patients describe experiences and needs before rectal cancer surgery and afterwards when confronting with bowel problems. Follow-up care should be organised proactively and focus on management strategies and emotional support.

Permanent stoma rates after anterior resection for rectal cancer: risk prediction scoring using preoperative variables

BACKGROUND

A permanent stoma after anterior resection for rectal cancer is common. Preoperative counselling could be improved by providing individualized accurate prediction modelling.

METHODS

Patients who underwent anterior resection between 2007 and 2015 were identified from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. National Patient Registry data were added to determine presence of a stoma 2 years after surgery. A training set based on the years 2007-2013 was employed in an ensemble of prediction models. Judged by the area under the receiving operating characteristic curve (AUROC), data from the years 2014-2015 were used to evaluate the predictive ability of all models. The best performing model was subsequently implemented in typical clinical scenarios and in an online calculator to predict the permanent stoma risk.

RESULTS

Patients in the training set (n = 3512) and the test set (n = 1136) had similar permanent stoma rates (13.6 and 15.2 per cent). The logistic regression model with a forward/backward procedure was the most parsimonious among several similarly performing models (AUROC 0.67, 95 per cent c.i. 0.63 to 0.72). Key predictors included co-morbidity, local tumour category, presence of metastasis, neoadjuvant therapy, defunctioning stoma use, tumour height, and hospital volume; the interaction between age and metastasis was also predictive.

CONCLUSION

Using routinely available preoperative data, the stoma outcome at 2 years after anterior resection for rectal cancer can be predicted fairly accurately.

Risk factors for poor health-related quality of life in patients with colon cancer include stoma and smoking habits

Background

Previous studies have shown that health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is associated with the prognosis of cancer patients. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors for poor HRQoL in patients with colon cancer.

Methods

This was a prospective population-based study of patients with colon cancer included between 2012 and 2016. HRQoL was measured using the cancer-specific European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire C30. Multiple linear regression analysis adjusted for age, sex, body mass index, smoking habits, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, emergency/elective surgery, resection with/without a stoma and tumour stage was used.

Results

A total of 67% (376/561) of all incident patients with colon cancer (196 [52.1%] females) was included. Mean (range) age was 73 (30–96) years. Patients with worse health (American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 3 and 4), those with higher body mass index, smokers and those planned to undergo surgical treatment with a stoma were at a higher risk for poor HRQoL than the other included patients at baseline and 6-month follow-up.

Conclusions

Patient characteristics such as smoking, high body mass index and worse physical health as well as treatment with a stoma were associated with lower HRQoL. Health care for such patients should focus on social and lifestyle behavioural support and stoma closure, when possible.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT 03910894).

Risk of Covert Submucosal Cancer in Patients With Granular Mixed Laterally Spreading Tumors

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Granular mixed laterally spreading tumors (GM-LSTs) have an intermediate level of risk for submucosal invasive cancer (SMICs) without clear signs of invasion (covert); the optimal resection method is uncertain. We aimed to determine the risk of covert SMIC in GM-LSTs based on clinical and endoscopic factors.

METHODS

We collected data from 693 patients (50.6% male; median age, 69 years) with colorectal GM-LSTs, without signs of invasion, who underwent endoscopic resection (74.2%) or endoscopic submucosal dissection (25.2%) at 7 centers in Italy from 2016 through 2019. We performed multivariate and univariate analyses to identify demographic and endoscopic factors associated with risk of SMIC. We developed a multivariate model to calculate the number needed to treat (NNT) to detect 1 SMIC.

RESULTS

Based on pathology analysis, 66 patients (9.5%) had covert SMIC. In multivariate analyses, increased risk of covert SMIC were independently associated with increasing lesion size (odds ratio per mm increase, 1.02, 95% CI, 1.01-1.03; P = .003) and rectal location (odds ratio, 3.08; 95% CI, 1.62-5.83; P = .004). A logistic regression model based on lesion size (with a cutoff of 40 mm) and rectal location identified patients with covert SMIC with 47.0% sensitivity, 82.6% specificity, and an area under the curve of 0.69. The NNT to identify 1 patient with a nonrectal SMIC smaller than 4 cm was 20; the NNT to identify 1 patient with a rectal SMIC of 4 cm or more was 5.

CONCLUSIONS

In an analysis of data from 693 patients, we found the risk of covert SMIC in patients with GM-LSTs to be approximately 10%. GM-LSTs of 4 cm or more and a rectal location are high risk and should be treated by en-bloc resection. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT03836131.

Restorative Surgery Is More Common in Ulcerative Colitis Patients With a High Income: A Population-Based Study

BACKGROUND

To avoid a permanent stoma, restorative surgery is performed after the colectomy. Previous studies have shown that less than half of patients with ulcerative colitis undergo restorative surgery.

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim was to explore the association between socioeconomic status and restorative surgery after colectomy.

DESIGN

This was a nationwide register-based cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted in Sweden.

PATIENTS

All Swedish patients with ulcerative colitis who underwent colectomy between 1990 and 2017 at the age of 15 to 69 years were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome was restorative surgery, and the secondary outcome was failure of the reconstruction (defined as the need for a new ileostomy after the reconstruction or nonreversal of a defunctioning stoma within 2 years of the reconstruction). To calculate HRs for restorative surgery after colectomy, as well as failure after restorative surgery, multivariable Cox regression models were performed (adjusted for sex, year of colectomy, colorectal cancer diagnosis, education, civil status, country of birth, income (quartiles 1 to 4, where Q4 represents highest income), hospital volume, and stratified by age).

RESULTS

In all, 5969 patients with ulcerative colitis underwent colectomy, and of those, 2794 (46.8%) underwent restorative surgery. Restorative surgery was more common in patients with a high income at the time of colectomy (quartile 1, reference; quartile 2, 1.09 (0.98-1.21); quartile 3, 1.20 (1.07-1.34); quartile 4, 1.27 (1.13-1.43)) and less common in those born in a Nordic country than in immigrants born in a non-Nordic country (0.86 (0.74-0.99)), whereas no association was seen with educational level and civil status. There was no association between socioeconomic status and the risk of failure after restorative surgery.

LIMITATIONS

The study was restricted to register data.

CONCLUSIONS

Restorative surgery in ulcerative colitis appears to be more common in patients with a high income and patients born in a non-Nordic country, indicating inequality in the provided care. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B433.

LA CIRUGA RESTAURADORA ES MS COMN EN PACIENTES CON COLITIS ULCEROSA CON INGRESOS ALTOS UN ESTUDIO POBLACIONAL

ANTECEDENTES:Para evitar un estoma permanente, se realiza una cirugía reparadora después de la colectomía. Estudios anteriores han demostrado que menos de la mitad de los pacientes con colitis ulcerosa se someten a cirugía reconstituyente.OBJETIVO:El objetivo principal fue explorar la asociación entre el nivel socioeconómico y la cirugía reconstituyente después de la colectomía.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte basado en registros a nivel nacional.MARCO:Suecia.PACIENTES:Todos los pacientes Suecos con colitis ulcerosa que se sometieron a colectomía desde el 1990 a 2017 a la edad de 15 a 69 años.MEDIDAS DE RESULTADOS PRINCIPALES:El resultado principal fue la cirugía restaurativa y el resultado secundario fue el fracaso de la reconstrucción (definida como la necesidad de una nueva ileostomía después de la reconstrucción o la no-reversión de un estoma disfuncional dentro de los dos años posteriores a la reconstrucción). Para calcular los cocientes de riesgo para la cirugía restauradora después de la colectomía, así como el fracaso después de la cirugía restauradora, se realizaron modelos de regresión de Cox multivariables (ajustados por sexo, año de colectomía, diagnóstico de cáncer colorrectal, educación, estado civil, país de nacimiento e ingresos (cuartiles 1- 4; donde Q4 representa los mayores ingresos), volumen de hospitales y estratificado por edad).RESULTADOS:En total 5969 pacientes con colitis ulcerosa se sometieron a colectomía, y de ellos 2794 (46,8%) se sometieron a cirugía restauradora. La cirugía restauradora fue más común en pacientes con altos ingresos en el momento de la colectomía (referencia del cuartil 1, cuartil 2: 1,09 (0,98-1,21), cuartil 3: 1,20 (1,07-1,34), cuartil 4: 1,27 (1,13-1,43)), y menos común en los nacidos en un país nórdico que en los inmigrantes nacidos en un país no-nórdico (0,86 (0,74-0,99)), mientras que no se observó asociación con el nivel educativo y el estado civil. No hubo asociación entre el nivel socioeconómico y el riesgo de fracaso después de la cirugía reparadora.LIMITACIONES:Restricción para registrar datos.CONCLUSIONES:La cirugía reparadora en colitis ulcerosa parece ser más común en pacientes con ingresos altos y en pacientes nacidos en un país no-nórdico, lo que indica desigualdad en la atención brindada. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B433.

Highly selective diversion with proactive leakage management after low anterior resection for rectal cancer

In this single center case series with nine percent primary diversion, 86 of 94 patients alive and with complete follow-up at one year had a functioning anastomosis. Seventy-five of the initial 99 patients never had a stoma. Meaning: Highly selective fecal diversion in combination with proactive leakage management, low anastomoses can be preserved safely, and the majority of patients will be spared all disadvantages of a diverting stoma.

Intersphincteric resection for low rectal cancer: the risk is functional rather than oncological. A 25-year experience from Bordeaux

AIM

There are few data evaluating the long-term outcomes of intersphincteric resection (ISR), especially the impact of inclusion of more juxtapositioned and intra-anal tumours on oncological and functional outcomes. We compared the oncological and functional results of patients treated by total mesorectal excision and ISR for low rectal cancer over a 25-year period.

METHOD

This is a retrospective study from a single institution evaluating results of ISR over three periods: 1990-1998, 1999-2006 and 2007-2014. Patients treated by partial or total ISR, with or without neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, for low rectal cancer (≤ 6 cm from the anal verge) were included. We compared postoperative morbidity, quality of surgery and oncological and functional outcomes in the time periods studied.

RESULTS

Of 813 patients operated on for low rectal cancer, 303 had ISR. Tumour stage did not differ; however, the distance of the tumour from the anorectal junction decreased from 1 to 0 cm (P < 0.001) and the distal resection margin shortened from 25 to 10 mm (P < 0.001) from 1990 to 2014. The postoperative morbidity and quality of surgery did not change significantly over time. The 5-year local recurrence (4.3% vs 5.9% vs 3.5%; P = 0.741) and disease-free survival (72% vs 71% vs 75%; P = 0.918) did not differ between the three time periods. Functional results improved during the last period; however, overall 42% of patients experienced major bowel dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

Pushing the envelope of sphincter-saving resection in ultra-low rectal cancer reaching or invading the anal sphincter did not compromise oncological and functional outcomes. The main limitation of the ISR procedure appears to be functional rather than oncological, suggesting that bowel rehabilitation programmes should be developed.

Salvage Surgery With Organ Preservation for Patients With Local Regrowth After Watch and Wait: Is It Still Possible?

BACKGROUND

Patients with rectal cancer who achieve complete clinical response after neoadjuvant chemoradiation have been managed nonoperatively. Thirty percent of these patients may develop a local regrowth, and salvage resection with radical surgery is usually recommended. However, selected patients could be offered additional organ preservation by local excision. We hypothesized that patients with baseline T2 who underwent neoadjuvant therapy (for the specific purpose of achieving a complete clinical response) were more likely to harbor recurrent disease at an earlier stage and amenable to organ preservation strategies (local excision) when compared with T3/T4 (undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation for oncologic reasons).

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare patients with local regrowth requiring salvage resection according to their baseline stage.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective review of consecutive patients with nonmetastatic distal rectal cancer undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

SETTINGS

The study included 2 independent tertiary centers with institutional watch-and-wait organ preservation programs.

PATIENTS

Consecutive patients with distal rectal cancer (cT2-4N1-2M0) managed by watch and wait and local regrowth from 2 institutions were included.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Final pathologic features and surgical and oncologic outcomes were compared according to baseline staging.

RESULTS

A total of 73 of 257 patients experienced local regrowth. cT2 presented similar to ypT, ypN, R0, and abdominal perineal resection rates (p > 0.05) at the time of salvage when compared with cT3 to cT4. Patients with cT2 at baseline were more likely to undergo an organ preservation procedure for salvage (56.2% vs 26.5%; p = 0.03). Overall and disease-free survival after salvage were similar between groups irrespective of the type of surgery for the regrowth.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective study, small sample size, and possible inaccurate baseline staging.

CONCLUSIONS

Although patients with baseline cT2 rectal cancer had similar pathologic stage at the time of recurrence, these patients were more likely to continue an organ preservation pathway after local regrowth through transanal local excision when compared with cT3 to cT4. Despite differences in the use of radical salvage resection, there were no differences in oncologic outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B254. CIRUGÍA DE RESCATE CON PRESERVACIÓN DE ORGANO PARA PACIENTES CON RECIDIVA LOCAL LUEGO DE WATCH & WAIT: ¿SIGUE SIENDO POSIBLE?: Los pacientes con cáncer rectal que logran una respuesta clínica completa luego de la quimiorradiación neoadyuvante han sido tratados de forma no quirúrgica. El treinta por ciento de estos pacientes pueden desarrollar un nuevo crecimiento local y generalmente se recomienda la resección de rescate con cirugía radical. Sin embargo, en pacientes seleccionados se podría ofrecer la posibilidad de preservación de órgano mediante escisión local. Se formuló la hipótesis de que los pacientes con estadio clinico inicial T2 y sometidos a terapia neoadyuvante (con el propósito específico de lograr una respuesta clínica completa) tenían más probabilidades de presentar una recurrencia local en una etapa más temprana y suceptibles de estrategias de preservación de órgano (escisión local) en comparación con T3 / T4 (sometidos a nCRT por razones oncológicas).Comparar los pacientes con recidiva local que requirieron cirugia de rescate de acuerdo con su estadio inicial.Revisión retrospectiva de pacientes consecutivos con cáncer de recto distal no metastásico sometidos a quimiorradiación neoadyuvante.Dos centros terciarios independientes con programas institucionales de preservación de órgano - Watch & Wait.Pacientes consecutivos con cáncer rectal distal (cT2-4N1-2M0) manejados por Watch & Wait y recidiva local.Las características patológicas finales, los resultados quirúrgicos y oncológicos se compararon de acuerdo con la estadificación inicial.Un total de 73 de 257 pacientes presentaron recidiva local. cT2 presentaron similares ypT, ypN, R0 y tasas de resección abdominoperineal (p>0,05) en el momento del rescate en comparación con cT3-4.Los pacientes con cT2 de base tuvieron más probabilidades de someterse a un procedimiento de preservación de órgano durante el rescate (56,2% frente a 26,5%; p = 0,03). Supervivencia general y DFS después del rescate fueron similares entre los grupos, independientemente del tipo de cirugía para la recidiva.Estudio retrospectivo, tamaño de muestra pequeño, la posible estadificación basal inexacta.Aunque los pacientes con cáncer rectal cT2 de base presentaron estadio patologico similar en el momento de la recidiva, estos pacientes tuvieron más probabilidades de continuar una vía de preservación de órgano luego de una recidiva local a través de la escisión local transanal en comparación con cT3-4. A pesar de las diferencias en el uso de la resección radical de rescate, no hubo diferencias en los resultados oncológicos. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B254.