Association Between Hospital and Surgeon Volume and Rectal Cancer Surgery Outcomes in Patients With Rectal Cancer Treated Since 2000: Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis

Association Between Cross-Stapling Technique in Mechanical Colorectal Anastomosis and Short-term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The double-stapled technique is the most common method of colorectal anastomosis in minimally invasive surgery. Several modifications to the conventional technique have been described to reduce the intersection between the stapled lines, as the resulting lateral dog-ears are considered possible risk factors for anastomotic leakage.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to analyze the outcomes of patients receiving conventional versus modified stapled colorectal anastomosis after minimally invasive surgery.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review of the published literature was undertaken. PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Embase databases were screened up to July 2023.

STUDY SELECTION

Relevant articles were searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Articles reporting on the outcomes of patients with modified stapled colorectal reconstruction compared with the conventional method of double-stapled anastomosis were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Conventional double-stapling colorectal anastomosis and modified techniques with reduced intersection between the stapled lines were compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The rate of anastomotic leak was the primary end point of interest. Perioperative details including postoperative morbidity were also appraised.

RESULTS

There were 2537 patients from 12 studies included for data extraction, with no significant differences in age, BMI, or proportion of high ASA score between patients who had conventional versus modified techniques of reconstructions. The risk of anastomotic leak was 62% lower for the modified procedure than for the conventional procedure (OR = 0.38 [95% CI, 0.26-0.56]). The incidences of overall postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.57 [95% CI, 0.45-0.73]) and major morbidity (OR = 0.48 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]) following modified stapled anastomosis were significantly lower than following conventional double-stapled anastomosis.

LIMITATIONS

The retrospective nature of most included studies is a main limitation, essentially because of the lack of randomization and the risk of selection and detection bias.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence supports the modification of the conventional double-stapled technique with the elimination of 1 of both dog-ears as it is associated with a lower incidence of anastomotic-related morbidity.

Fragmentation of care in breast cancer: greater than the sum of its parts

INTRODUCTION

Fragmentation of care (FC, the receipt of care at > 1 institution) has been shown to negatively impact cancer outcomes. Given the multimodal nature of breast cancer treatment, we sought to identify factors associated with FC and its effects on survival of breast cancer patients.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of surgically treated, stage I-III breast cancer patients in the 2004-2020 National Cancer Database, excluding neoadjuvant therapy recipients. Patients were stratified into two groups: FC or non-FC care. Treatment delay was defined as definitive surgery > 60 days after diagnosis. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors predictive of FC, and survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox proportional hazards methods.

RESULTS

Of the 531,644 patients identified, 340,297 (64.0%) received FC. After adjustment, FC (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.25-1.29) was independently associated with treatment delay. Factors predictive of FC included Hispanic ethnicity (OR 1.04, 95% CI: 1.01-1.07), treatment at comprehensive community cancer programs (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.03-1.08) and integrated network cancer programs (OR 1.55, 95% CI: 1.51-1.59), AJCC stage II (OR 1.06, 95% CI 1.05-1.07) and stage III tumors (OR 1.06, 95% CI: 1.02-1.10), and HR + /HER2 + tumors (OR 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02-1.07). Treatment delay was independently associated with increased risk of mortality (HR 1.23, 95% CI 1.20-1.26), whereas FC (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.86-0.88) showed survival benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

While treatment delay negatively impacts survival in breast cancer patients, our findings suggest FC could be a marker for multispecialty care that may mitigate some of these effects.

Using CT-Based Pelvimetry and Visceral Obesity Measurements to Predict Total Mesorectal Excision Quality for Patients Undergoing Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

A complete total mesorectal excision is the criterion standard in curative rectal cancer surgery. Ensuring quality is challenging in a narrow pelvis, and obesity amplifies technical difficulties. Pelvimetry is the measurement of pelvic dimensions, but its role in gauging preoperatively the difficulty of proctectomy is largely unexplored.

OBJECTIVE

To determine pelvic structural factors associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision after curative proctectomy and build a predictive model for total mesorectal excision quality.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

A quaternary referral center database of patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma (2009-2017).

PATIENTS

Curative-intent proctectomy for rectal adenocarcinoma.

INTERVENTIONS

All radiological measurements were obtained from preoperative CT images using validated imaging processing software tools. Completeness of total mesorectal excision was obtained from histology reports.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Ability of radiological pelvimetry and obesity measurements to predict total mesorectal excision quality.

RESULTS

Of the 410 cases meeting inclusion criteria, 362 underwent a complete total mesorectal excision (88%). Multivariable regression identified a deeper sacral curve (per 100 mm 2 [OR: 1.14; 95% CI, 1.06-1.23; p < 0.001]) and a greater transverse distance of the pelvic outlet (per 10 mm [OR:1.41, 95% CI, 1.08-1.84; p = 0.012]) to be independently associated with incomplete total mesorectal excision. An increased area of the pelvic inlet (per 10 cm 2 [OR: 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97; p = 0.02) was associated with a higher rate of complete mesorectal excision. No difference in visceral obesity ratio and visceral obesity (ratio >0.4 vs <0.4) between BMI (<30 vs ≥30) and sex was identified. A model was built to predict mesorectal quality using the following variables: depth of sacral curve, area of pelvic inlet, and transverse distance of the pelvic outlet.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective analysis is not controlled for the choice of surgical approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Pelvimetry predicts total mesorectal excision quality in rectal cancer surgery and can alert surgeons preoperatively to cases of unusual difficulty. This predictive model may contribute to treatment strategy and aid in the comparison of outcomes between traditional and novel techniques of total mesorectal excision. See Video Abstract .

USO DE MEDICIONES DE PELVIMETRA Y OBESIDAD VISCERAL BASADAS EN TC PARA PREDECIR LA CALIDAD DE TME EN PACIENTES SOMETIDOS A CIRUGA DE CNCER DE RECTO

ANTECEDENTES:Una escisión mesorrectal total y completa es el estándar de oro en la cirugía curativa del cáncer de recto. Garantizar la calidad es un desafío en una pelvis estrecha y la obesidad amplifica las dificultades técnicas. La pelvimetría es la medición de las dimensiones pélvicas, pero su papel para medir la dificultad preoperatoria de la proctectomía está en gran medida inexplorado.OBJETIVO:Determinar los factores estructurales pélvicos asociados con la escisión mesorrectal total incompleta después de una proctectomía curativa y construir un modelo predictivo para la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ÁMBITO:Base de datos de un centro de referencia cuaternario de pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto (2009-2017).PACIENTES:Proctectomía con intención curativa para adenocarcinoma de recto.INTERVENCIONES:Todas las mediciones radiológicas se obtuvieron a partir de imágenes de TC preoperatorias utilizando herramientas de software de procesamiento de imágenes validadas. La integridad de la escisión mesorrectal total se obtuvo a partir de informes histológicos.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE VALORACIÓN:Capacidad de la pelvimetría radiológica y las mediciones de obesidad para predecir la calidad total de la escisión mesorrectal.RESULTADOS:De los 410 casos que cumplieron los criterios de inclusión, 362 tuvieron una escisión mesorrectal total completa (88%). Una regresión multivariable identificó una curva sacra más profunda (por 100 mm2); OR:1,14,[IC95%:1,06-1,23,p<0,001], y mayor distancia transversal de salida pélvica (por 10mm); OR:1,41, [IC 95%:1,08-1,84,p=0,012] como asociación independiente con escisión mesorrectal total incompleta. Un área aumentada de entrada pélvica (por 10 cm2); OR:0,85, [IC95%:0,75-0,97,p=0,02] se asoció con una mayor tasa de escisión mesorrectal completa. No se identificaron diferencias en la proporción de obesidad visceral y la obesidad visceral (proporción>0,4 vs.<0,4) entre el índice de masa corporal (<30 vs.>=30) o el sexo. Se construyó un modelo para predecir la calidad mesorrectal utilizando variables: profundidad de la curva sacra, área de la entrada pélvica y distancia transversal de la salida pélvica.LIMITACIONES:Análisis retrospectivo no controlado por la elección del abordaje quirúrgico.CONCLUSIONES:La pelvimetría predice la calidad de la escisión mesorrectal total en la cirugía del cáncer de recto y puede alertar a los cirujanos preoperatoriamente sobre casos de dificultad inusual. Este modelo predictivo puede contribuir a la estrategia de tratamiento y ayudar en la comparación de resultados entre técnicas tradicionales y novedosas de escisión mesorrectal total. (Traducción- Dr. Ingrid Melo).

Perspectives on Referring for Rectal Cancer Surgery: a Survey Study of Gastroenterologist and General Surgeons in Iowa

PURPOSE

To understand referral practices for rectal cancer surgical care and to secondarily determine differences in referral practices by two main hypothesized drivers of referral: the rurality of the community endoscopists' practice and their affiliation with a colorectal surgeon.

METHODS

Community gastroenterologists and general surgeons in Iowa completed a mailed questionnaire on practice demographics, volume, and referral practices for rectal cancer patients. Rurality was operationalized with RUCA codes.

RESULTS

Twenty-two of 53 gastroenterologists (42%) and 120 of 188 general surgeons (64%) (total 144/241, 60%) in Iowa responded. Most performed colonoscopies, including 22 gastroenterologists (100%) and 96 general surgeons (80%). Regular referral of rectal cancer patients to colorectal surgeons was reported for 57% of urban physicians affiliated with a colorectal surgeon, 33% of urban physicians not affiliated with a colorectal surgeon, and 57% and 72% of physicians in large and small rural areas, respectively, who were not affiliated with a colorectal surgeon. High surgeon volume, high hospital volume, and colorectal surgeon specialty were important factors in the referral decisions for over half the physicians. 69% of diagnosing urban general surgeons reported performing rectal cancer surgery about half the time or more, while 85% of small rural and 60% of large rural diagnosing general surgeons reported never or rarely performing rectal cancer surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnosing physicians have variable rectal cancer referral practices, including consistency in referred to surgeon and prioritization of volume and specialization. Prioritizing specialized or high-volume rectal cancer surgical care would require changing existing referring patterns.

Patient management after primary rectal cancer diagnosis. Special focus on surgical treatment for non-metastatic disease

Background: Rectal cancer is a public health priority. Primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the quality of care for non-metastatic rectal cancer using process and outcome indicators. Delay of management, length of stay and readmission rate, sphincter preservation, morbidity, number of examined lymph nodes, mortality, overall and disease-free survivals were evaluated. Secondary objectives were to estimate the relationship between possible predictive parameters for (1) anastomotic leakage (logistic regression), (2) overall or disease-free survivals (cox regression).Methods: We performed a retrospective study on 312 consecutive patients diagnosed with primary rectal cancer between 2016 and 2019. We focused on the 163 patients treated by surgery for non-metastatic cancer.Results: The treatment began within 33 days (range 0-264) after incidence, resection rate was 67%. Digestive continuity rate in lower, middle and upper rectum was 30%, 87% and 96%. Median of 14 lymph nodes (range 1-46) was analyzed. Length of stay and readmission rate were 11 days (range 3-56) and 4%, respectively. Within 90 postoperative days, clinical anastomotic leakage occurred in 9.2% of cases, major morbidity rate was 17%, mortality 1.2%. Multivariate analysis revealed that stoma decreased the risk of anastomotic leakage [hazard ratio: 0.16; 95% confidence intervals: 0.04-0.63; p = 0.008]. The 5-year overall survival after surgery was 85 ± 4%, disease-free survival 83 ± 4%. Patients with major complications, male gender and R1/R2 resection margin had a poorer prognosis.Conclusion: This work showed encouraging results in rectal cancer treatment in our institution, our results were in line with recommendations at the time.

Treatment in certified cancer centers is related to better survival in patients with colon and rectal cancer: evidence from a large German cohort study

BACKGROUND

Certified cancer centers aim to ensure high-quality care by establishing structural and procedural standards according to evidence-based guidelines. Despite the high clinical and health policy relevance, evidence from a nation-wide study for the effectiveness of care for colorectal cancer in certified centers vs. other hospitals in Germany is still missing.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study covering the years 2009-2017, we analyzed patient data using demographic information, diagnoses, and treatments from a nationwide statutory health insurance enriched with information on certification. We investigated whether patients with incident colon or rectal cancer did benefit from primary therapy in a certified cancer center. We used relative survival analysis taking into account mortality data of the German population and adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics via Cox regression with shared frailty for patients in hospitals with and without certification.

RESULTS

The cohorts for colon and rectal cancer consisted of 109,518 and 51,417 patients, respectively, treated in a total of 1052 hospitals. 37.2% of patients with colon and 42.9% of patients with rectal cancer were treated in a certified center. Patient age, sex, comorbidities, secondary malignoma, and distant metastases were similar across groups (certified/non-certified) for both colon and rectal cancer. Relative survival analysis showed significantly better survival of patients treated in a certified center, with 68.3% (non-certified hospitals 65.8%) 5-year survival for treatment of colon cancer in certified (p < 0.001) and 65.0% (58.8%) 5-year survival in case of rectal cancer (p < 0.001), respectively. Cox regression with adjustment for relevant covariates yielded a lower hazard of death for patients treated in certified centers for both colon (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.89-0.95) and rectal cancer (HR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.88-0.95). The results remained robust in a series of sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This large cohort study yields new important evidence that patients with colorectal cancer have a better chance of survival if treated in a certified cancer center. Certification thus provides one powerful means to improve the quality of care for colorectal cancer. To decrease the burden of disease, more patients should thus receive cancer care in a certified center.

Specialty-Certified Colorectal Surgeons Demonstrate Favorable Short-term Surgical Outcomes for Laparoscopic Low Anterior Resection: Assessment of a Japanese Nationwide Database

BACKGROUND

There are few studies on the impact of a colorectal-specific technically certified surgeon on good surgical outcomes for laparoscopic low anterior resection in the real world.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic low anterior resection with the participation of a certified colorectal surgeon.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study using a Japanese nationwide database.

SETTING

This study was conducted as a project for the Japan Society of Endoscopic Surgery and the Japanese Society of Gastroenterological Surgery.

PATIENTS

This study included 41,741 patients listed in the National Clinical Database who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection performed by certified, noncertified, and colorectal-specific certified surgeons, according to the Endoscopic Surgical Skill Qualification System, from 2016 to 2018.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Operative mortality rate and anastomotic leak rate were the primary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Overall 30-day mortality and operative mortality were 0.2% and 0.3%, respectively, without significant differences between all kinds of certified and noncertified surgeon groups. Overall anastomotic leak rate was 9.3%, with a significant difference between the 2 groups. Colorectal- and stomach-certified groups had lower 30-day mortality and operative mortality than the biliary-certified and noncertified groups. The anastomotic leak rate was the lowest in the colorectal-certified group. Based on a logistic regression analysis using the risk-adjusted model, operative mortality was significantly higher in the biliary-certified group than in the colorectal-certified group. Moreover, anastomotic leak rate was significantly lower in the colorectal-certified group than in the stomach-certified and noncertified groups.

LIMITATIONS

This study was a retrospective study, and there was a possibility of different definitions of anastomotic leak due to the use of a nationwide database.

CONCLUSIONS

The participation of a colorectal-specific certified surgeon may decrease the risk of operative mortality and anastomotic leak for laparoscopic low anterior resection.

CIRUJANO COLORRECTAL ALTAMENTE CALIFICADO PROVOCA RESULTADOS QUIRRGICOS FAVORABLES A CORTO PLAZO PARA LA RESECCIN ANTERIOR BAJA LAPAROSCPICA EVALUACIN DE LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL JAPONESA

ANTECEDENTES:Hay pocos estudios sobre el impacto de un cirujano certificado técnicamente especializado en cáncer colorrectal con un buen resultado quirúrgico para la resección anterior baja laparoscópica en el mundo real.OBJETIVO:Evaluar los resultados a corto plazo de la resección anterior baja laparoscópica con la participación de un cirujano colorrectal certificado.DISEÑO:Este fue un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo que utilizó una base de datos nacional japonesa.AJUSTE:Este estudio se realizó como un proyecto para la Sociedad Japonesa de Cirugía Endoscópica y la Sociedad Japonesa de Cirugía Gastroenterológica.PACIENTES:este estudio incluyó a 41 741 pacientes incluidos en la base de datos clínica nacional que se sometieron a una resección anterior baja laparoscópica realizada por cirujanos certificados, no certificados y certificados específicamente colorrectales, según el Sistema de calificación de habilidades quirúrgicas endoscópicas de 2016 a 2018.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La tasa de mortalidad operatoria y la tasa de fuga anastomótica fueron los resultados primarios.RESULTADOS:La mortalidad general a los 30 días y la mortalidad operatoria fueron del 0,2 % y el 0,3 %, respectivamente, sin diferencias significativas entre los grupos de todos los tipos de cirujanos certificados y no certificados. La tasa global de fuga anastomótica fue del 9,3 %, con una diferencia significativa entre los dos grupos. Los grupos con certificación colorrectal y estomacal tuvieron una mortalidad a los 30 días y una mortalidad operatoria más bajas que los grupos con certificación biliar y sin certificación. La tasa de fuga anastomótica fue la más baja en el grupo certificado colorrectal. Con base en un análisis de regresión logística utilizando el modelo ajustado por riesgo, la mortalidad operatoria fue significativamente más alta en el grupo con certificación biliar que en el grupo con certificación colorrectal. Además, la tasa de fuga anastomótica fue significativamente más baja en el grupo con certificación colorrectal que en los grupos con certificación estomacal y sin certificación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio fue retrospectivo y existía la posibilidad de diferentes definiciones de fuga anastomótica debido al uso de una base de datos nacional.CONCLUSIONES:La participación de un cirujano certificado en video específico colorrectal puede disminuir el riesgo de mortalidad operatoria y fuga anastomótica para la resección anterior baja laparoscópica. (Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

What is the impact of hospital and surgeon volumes on outcomes in rectal cancer surgery?

AIM

Evidence for a positive volume-outcome relationship for rectal cancer surgery is unclear. This study aims to evaluate the volume-outcome relationship for rectal cancer surgery at hospital and surgeon level in the English National Health Service (NHS).

METHOD

All patients undergoing a rectal cancer resection in the English NHS between 2015 and 2019 were included. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression was used to model relationships between outcomes and mean annual hospital and surgeon volumes (using a linear plus a quadratic term for volume) with adjustment for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 13 858 patients treated in 166 hospitals were included. Six hospitals (3.6%) performed fewer than 10 rectal cancer resections per year, and 381 surgeons (45.0%) performed fewer than five such resections per year. Patients treated by high-volume surgeons had a reduced length of stay (p = 0.016). No statistically significant volume-outcome relationships were demonstrated for 90-day mortality, 30-day unplanned readmission, unplanned return to theatre, stoma at 18 months following anterior resection, positive circumferential resection margin and 2-year all-cause mortality at either hospital or surgeon level (p values > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Almost half of colorectal surgeons in England do not meet national guidelines for rectal cancer surgeons to perform a minimum of five major resections annually. However, our results suggest that centralizing rectal cancer surgery with the main focus of increasing operative volume may have limited impact on NHS surgical outcomes. Therefore, quality improvement initiatives should address a wider range of evidence-based process measures, across the multidisciplinary care pathway, to enhance outcomes for patients with rectal cancer.

Initial Cancer Treatment in Certified Versus Non-Certified Hospitals

BACKGROUND

According to the National Cancer Plan in Germany, all cancer patients should receive high-quality care in accordance with evidence-based treatment guidelines. Certification programs were established for this purpose but have not yet been comprehensively evaluated.

METHODS

In the WiZen project, which was supported by the Innovation Fund (supported project number 01VSF17020), controlled cohort studies were performed to investigate whether initial treatment in hospitals with or without a certificate from the German Cancer Society was associated with a difference in overall survival (primary endpoint) in patients with cancer of the colon, rectum, lung, pancreas, breast, cervix, prostate, endometrium, and ovary, head and neck cancer, and neuro-oncological tumors. The studies were based on nationwide data from adult insurees of the AOK statutory health insurance carrier for the years 2009-2017.

RESULTS

The majority of patients with all entities except breast cancer received their initial treatment in non-certified hospitals. Initial treatment in a certified hospital was found to be beneficial in terms of overall survival for all cancer entities, even after extensive adjustment for patient- and hospital-related confounders. The hazard ratio (HR) ranged from 0.97 (95% CI: [0.94; 1.00]) for lung cancer to 0.77 [0.74; 0.81] for breast cancer, corresponding to an absolute risk reduction (ARR) for overall survival of 0.62 months for lung cancer to 4.61 months for cervical cancer.

CONCLUSION

The WiZen study shows for the entities studied that initial cancer treatment in a certified center is associated with lower mortality. Despite the recommendations of the National Cancer Plan, however, more than 40% of all cancer patients still receive their initial treatment in a non-certified hospital. The preferential provision of initial care in certified hospitals would be likely to improve overall survival. Although the study design does not permit any conclusion with regard to causality, the findings seem robust considering that a control group was used, confounders were taken into account, and the study population was of large size.

Persistence of Poverty and its Impact on Surgical Care and Postoperative Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

We sought to characterize the association between prolonged county-level poverty with postoperative outcomes.

BACKGROUND

The impact of long-standing poverty on surgical outcomes remains ill-defined.

METHODS

Patients who underwent lung resection, colectomy, coronary artery bypass graft, or lower extremity joint replacement were identified from Medicare Standard Analytical Files Database (2015-2017) and merged with data from the American Community Survey and the United States Department of Agriculture. Patients were categorized according to the duration of high poverty status from 1980 to 2015 [ie, never high poverty (NHP), persistent poverty (PP)]. Logistic regression was used to characterize the association between the duration of poverty and postoperative outcomes. Principal component and generalized structural equation modeling were used to assess the effect of mediators in the achievement of Textbook Outcomes (TO).

RESULTS

Overall, 335,595 patients underwent lung resection (10.1%), colectomy (29.4%), coronary artery bypass graft (36.4%), or lower extremity joint replacement (24.2%). While 80.3% of patients lived in NHP, 4.4% resided in PP counties. Compared with NHP, patients residing in PP were at increased risk of serious postoperative complications [odds ratio (OR)=1.10, 95% CI: 1.05-1.15], 30-day readmission (OR=1.09, 95% CI: 1.01-1.16), 30-day mortality (OR=1.08, 95% CI: 1.00-1.17), and higher expenditures (mean difference, $1010.0, 95% CI: 643.7-1376.4) (all P <0.05). Notably, PP was associated with lower odds of achieving TO (OR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.90-0.97, P <0.001); 65% of this effect was mediated by other social determinant factors. Minority patients were less likely to achieve TO (OR=0.81, 95% CI: 0.79-0.84, P <0.001), and the disparity persisted across all poverty categories.

CONCLUSIONS

County-level poverty duration was associated with adverse postoperative outcomes and higher expenditures. These effects were mediated by various socioeconomic factors and were most pronounced among minority patients.

How Far Is Too Far? Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Regionalized Rectal Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Regionalized rectal cancer surgery may decrease postoperative and long-term cancer-related mortality. However, the regionalization of care may be an undue burden on patients.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of regionalized rectal cancer surgery.

DESIGN

Tree-based decision analysis.

PATIENTS

Patients with stage II/III rectal cancer anatomically suitable for low anterior resection were included.

SETTING

Rectal cancer surgery performed at a high-volume regional center rather than the closest hospital available.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental costs ($) and effectiveness (quality-adjusted life year) reflected a societal perspective and were time-discounted at 3%. Costs and benefits were combined to produce the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio ($ per quality-adjusted life year). Multivariable probabilistic sensitivity analysis modeled uncertainty in probabilities, costs, and effectiveness.

RESULTS

Regionalized surgery economically dominated local surgery. Regionalized rectal cancer surgery was both less expensive on average ($50,406 versus $65,430 in present-day costs) and produced better long-term outcomes (10.36 versus 9.51 quality-adjusted life years). The total costs and inconvenience of traveling to a regional high-volume center would need to exceed $15,024 per patient to achieve economic breakeven alone or $112,476 per patient to satisfy conventional cost-effectiveness standards. These results were robust on sensitivity analysis and maintained in 94.6% of scenario testing.

LIMITATIONS

Decision analysis models are limited to policy level rather than individualized decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Regionalized rectal cancer surgery improves clinical outcomes and reduces total societal costs compared to local surgical care. Prescriptive measures and patient inducements may be needed to expand the role of regionalized surgery for rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C83 .

QU TAN LEJOS ES DEMASIADO LEJOS ANLISIS DE COSTOEFECTIVIDAD DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER DE RECTO REGIONALIZADO

ANTECEDENTES:La cirugía de cáncer de recto regionalizado puede disminuir la mortalidad posoperatoria y a largo plazo relacionada con el cáncer. Sin embargo, la regionalización de la atención puede ser una carga indebida para los pacientes.OBJETIVO:Evaluar la rentabilidad de la cirugía oncológica de recto regionalizada.DISEÑO:Análisis de decisiones basado en árboles.PACIENTES:Pacientes con cáncer de recto en estadio II/III anatómicamente aptos para resección anterior baja.AJUSTE:Cirugía de cáncer rectal realizada en un centro regional de alto volumen en lugar del hospital más cercano disponible.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los costos incrementales ($) y la efectividad (años de vida ajustados por calidad) reflejaron una perspectiva social y se descontaron en el tiempo al 3%. Los costos y los beneficios se combinaron para producir la relación costo-efectividad incremental ($ por año de vida ajustado por calidad). El análisis de sensibilidad probabilístico multivariable modeló la incertidumbre en las probabilidades, los costos y la efectividad.RESULTADOS:La cirugía regionalizada predominó económicamente la cirugía local. La cirugía de cáncer de recto regionalizado fue menos costosa en promedio ($50 406 versus $65 430 en costos actuales) y produjo mejores resultados a largo plazo (10,36 versus 9,51 años de vida ajustados por calidad). Los costos totales y la inconveniencia de viajar a un centro regional de alto volumen necesitarían superar los $15,024 por paciente para alcanzar el punto de equilibrio económico o $112,476 por paciente para satisfacer los estándares convencionales de rentabilidad. Estos resultados fueron sólidos en el análisis de sensibilidad y se mantuvieron en el 94,6% de las pruebas de escenarios.LIMITACIONES:Los modelos de análisis de decisiones se limitan al nivel de políticas en lugar de la toma de decisiones individualizada.CONCLUSIONES:La cirugía de cáncer de recto regionalizada mejora los resultados clínicos y reduce los costos sociales totales en comparación con la atención quirúrgica local. Es posible que se necesiten medidas prescriptivas e incentivos para los pacientes a fin de ampliar el papel de la cirugía regionalizada para el cáncer de recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C83 . (Traducción- Dr. Francisco M. Abarca-Rendon ).

Who should operate patients presenting with emergent colon cancer? A comparison of short- and long-term outcome depending on surgical sub-specialization

BACKGROUND

Colorectal cancer presents as emergencies in 20% of the cases. Emergency resection is associated with high postoperative morbidity and mortality. The specialization of the operating team in the emergency settings differs from the elective setting, which may have an impact on outcome. The aim of this study was to evaluate short- and long-term outcomes following emergent colon cancer surgery depending on sub-specialization of the operating team.

METHODS

This is a retrospective population study based on data from the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry (SCRCR). In total, 656 patients undergoing emergent surgery for colon cancer between 2011 and 2016 were included. The cohort was divided in groups according to specialization of the operating team: (1) colorectal team (CRT); (2) emergency surgical team (EST); (3) general surgical team (GST). The impact of specialization on short- and long-term outcomes was analyzed.

RESULTS

No statistically significant difference in 5-year overall survival (CRT 48.3%; EST 45.7%; GST 42.5%; p = 0.60) or 3-year recurrence-free survival (CRT 80.7%; EST 84.1%; GST 77.7%21.1%; p = 0.44) was noted between the groups. Neither was any significant difference in 30-day mortality (4.4%; 8.1%; 5.5%, p = 0.20), 90-day mortality (8.8; 11.9; 7.9%, p = 0.37) or postoperative complication rate (35.5%, 35.9 30.7, p = 0.52) noted between the groups. Multivariate analysis adjusted for case-mix showed no difference in hazard ratios for long-term survival or postoperative complications. The rate of permanent stoma after 3 years was higher in the EST group compared to the CRT and GST groups (34.5% vs. 24.3% and 23.9%, respectively; p < 0.0.5).

CONCLUSION

Surgical sub-specialization did not significantly affect postoperative complication rate, nor short- or long-term survival after emergent operation for colon cancer. Patients operated by emergency surgical teams were more likely to have a permanent stoma after 3 years.

Impact of patient choice and hospital competition on patient outcomes after rectal cancer surgery: A national population-based study

BACKGROUND

The objective of the current national cohort study was to analyze the correlation between choice and competition on outcomes after cancer surgery in rectal cancer.

METHODS

The analysis included all men who underwent rectal cancer surgery in the English National Health Service between March 2015 and April 2019 (n = 13,996). Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the effect of a rectal cancer surgery center being located in a competitive environment (based on the number of centers within a threshold distance) and being a successful competitor (based on the ability to attract patients from other hospitals) on eight patient-level outcomes: 30- and 90-day emergency readmissions, 30-day re-operation rates, 90-day postoperative mortality, length of stay >14 days, circumferential resection margin status, rates of primary procedure with a permanent stoma, and rates of persistent stoma 18 months after anterior resection.

RESULTS

With adjustment for patient characteristics, patients who underwent surgery in centers located in a stronger competitive environment were less likely to have an abdominoperineal excision or a Hartman's procedure (odds ratio [OR], 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.55-0.97, p = .04). Additionally, individuals who received treatment at hospitals that were successful competitors had a lower risk of a 90-day readmission following rectal cancer surgery (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97, p = .03) and were less likely to have a persistent stoma at 18 months after anterior resection (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61-0.93, p = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitals located in areas of high competition are associated with better patient outcomes and improved processes of care for rectal cancer surgery.

Association of Quality and Technology With Patient Mobility for Colorectal Cancer Surgery

Importance

Many health care systems publish hospital-level quality measures as a driver of hospital performance and to support patient choice, but it is not known if patients with cancer respond to them.

Objective

To investigate hospital quality and patient factors associated with treatment location.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This choice modeling study used national administrative hospital data. Patients with colon and rectal cancer treated in all 163 English National Health Service (NHS) hospitals delivering colorectal cancer surgery between April 2016 and March 2019 were included. The extent to which patients chose to bypass their nearest surgery center was investigated, and conditional logistic regression was used to estimate the association of additional travel time, hospital quality measures, and patient characteristics with treatment location.

Exposures

Additional travel time in minutes, hospital characteristics, and patient characteristics: age, sex, cancer T stage, socioeconomic status, comorbidity, and rural or urban residence.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Treatment location.

Results

Overall, 44 299 patients were included in the final cohort (mean [SD] age, 68.9 [11.6] years; 18 829 [42.5%] female). A total of 8550 of 31 258 patients with colon cancer (27.4%) and 3933 of 13 041 patients with rectal cancer (30.2%) bypassed their nearest surgical center. Travel time was strongly associated with treatment location. The association was less strong for younger, more affluent patients and those from rural areas. For rectal cancer, patients were more likely to travel to a hospital designated as a specialist colorectal cancer surgery center (odds ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.13-1.87; P = .004) and to a hospital performing robotic surgery for rectal cancer (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.11-1.86; P = .007). Patients were less likely to travel to hospitals deemed to have inadequate care by the national quality regulator (odds ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.97; P = .03). Patients were not more likely to travel to hospitals with better 2-year bowel cancer mortality outcomes.

Conclusions and Relevance

Patients appear responsive to hospital characteristics that reflect overall hospital quality and the availability of robotic surgery but not to specific disease-related outcome measures. Policies allowing patients to choose where they have colorectal cancer surgery may not result in better outcomes but could drive inequities in the health care system.

Association of hospital volume with postoperative outcomes in Crohn's disease

AIM

Most patients diagnosed with Crohn's disease (CD) require surgery during their lifetime. While the literature has shown that certain cancer patients have superior postoperative outcomes at high-volume hospitals, there remains a paucity of data on the hospital volume-outcome relationship in CD. Given the complexities in both medical and surgical management, this study aims to determine whether patients with CD have superior postoperative outcomes at high-volume hospitals.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing abdominal surgery for CD in New York hospitals between 2012 and 2018 was performed using data from the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperation System. Outcomes included postoperative mortality, 30-day readmission and postoperative complications. Using a penalized B-spline plot, high-volume centres were defined as those performing more than 160 abdominal surgeries for CD each year.

RESULTS

A total of 13,221 surgeries were performed across 176 hospital centres in New York State. Of these, 73.9% of procedures occurred at low-volume centres. High-volume hospitals had lower in-hospital mortality (0.5% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001) and 30-day readmission rates (8.3% vs. 10.4%; p < 0.001) than low-volume centres. Major postoperative complications and reoperation rates did not differ by hospital volume. On multivariate analysis, patients at high-volume hospitals had lower odds of in-hospital mortality (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.38-0.75) and 30-day readmission (OR 0.79, 95%CI 0.64-0.98). Hospital volume remained an independent predictor of 30-day readmission for emergent admissions (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61-0.85) and in-hospital mortality for nonemergent admissions (OR 0.39, 95% CI 0.19-0.82).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing abdominal surgery for CD have lower odds of postoperative mortality and 30-day readmission when the operation occurs at a high-volume hospital. These findings suggest that surgical patients with CD may benefit from care at specialized centres.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DESIGN

Cross-sectional study.

SETTING

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

PARTICIPANTS

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

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN10188560.

Referrals and Decision-Making Considerations Involved in Selecting a Surgeon for Rectal Cancer Treatment in the Midwestern United States

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence of superior outcomes for rectal cancer at high-volume, multidisciplinary cancer centers, many patients undergo surgery in low-volume hospitals.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine considerations of former patients with rectal cancer when selecting their surgeon and to evaluate which considerations were associated with surgery at high-volume hospitals.

DESIGN

In this retrospective cohort study, patients were surveyed about what they considered when selecting a cancer surgeon.

SETTINGS

Study data were obtained via survey and the statewide Iowa Cancer Registry.

PATIENTS

All eligible individuals diagnosed with invasive stages II/III rectal cancer from 2013 to 2017 identified through the registry were invited to participate.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the characteristics of the hospital where they received surgery (ie, National Cancer Institute designation, Commission on Cancer accreditation, and rectal cancer surgery volume).

RESULTS

Among respondents, 318 of 417 (76%) completed surveys. Sixty-nine percent of patients selected their surgeon based on their physician's referral/recommendation, 20% based on surgeon/hospital reputation, and 11% based on personal connections to the surgeon. Participants who chose their surgeon based on reputation had significantly higher odds of surgery at National Cancer Institute-designated (OR 7.5; 95% CI, 3.8-15.0) or high-volume (OR 2.6; 95% CI, 1.2-5.7) hospitals than those who relied on referral.

LIMITATIONS

This study took place in a Midwestern state with a predominantly white population, which limited our ability to evaluate racial/ethnic associations.

CONCLUSION

Most patients with rectal cancer relied on referrals in selecting their surgeon, and those who did were less likely to receive surgery at a National Cancer Institute-designated or high-volume hospitals compared to those who considered reputation. Future research is needed to determine the impact of these decision factors on clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and quality of life. In addition, patients should be aware that relying on physician referral may not result in treatment from the most experienced or comprehensive care setting in their area. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897.REMISIONES Y CONSIDERACIONES PARA LA TOMA DE DECISIONES RELACIONADAS CON LA SELECCIÓN DE UN CIRUJANO PARA EL TRATAMIENTO DEL CÁNCER DE RECTO EN EL MEDIO OESTE DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOSANTECEDENTES:A pesar de la evidencia de resultados superiores para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto en centros oncológicos de gran volumen y multidisciplinarios, muchos pacientes se someten a cirugía en hospitales de bajo volumen.OBJETIVOS:Examinar las consideraciones de los antiguos pacientes con cáncer de recto al momento de seleccionar a su cirujano y evaluar qué consideraciones se asociaron con la cirugía en hospitales de gran volumen.DISEÑO:Encuestamos a los pacientes sobre qué aspectos consideraron al elegir un cirujano oncológico para completar este estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AJUSTE:Los datos del estudio se obtuvieron mediante una encuesta y el Registro de Cáncer del estado de Iowa.PACIENTES:Se invitó a participar a todas las personas elegibles diagnosticadas con cáncer de recto invasivo en estadios II/III entre 2013 y 2017 identificadas a través del registro.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Los resultados principales fueron las características del hospital donde fue realizada la cirugía (es decir, designación del Instituto Nacional del Cáncer, acreditación de la Comisión de Cáncer y volumen de cirugía del cáncer de recto).RESULTADOS:Hubo 318 de 417 (76%) encuestas completadas. El sesenta y nueve por ciento seleccionó a su cirujano en función de la referencia / recomendación de su médico, el 20% por la reputación del cirujano/hospital, y el 11% por sus conexiones personales con el cirujano. Los participantes que eligieron a su cirujano en función a la reputación tuvieron probabilidades significativamente más altas de cirugía en el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer designado (OR = 7,5, IC del 95%: 3,8-15,0) o en hospitales de alto volumen (OR = 2,6, IC del 95%: 1,2-5,7) que aquellos que dependían de la derivación.LIMITACIONES:Este estudio se llevó a cabo en un estado del medio oeste con una población predominantemente blanca, lo que limitó nuestra capacidad para evaluar las asociaciones raciales/étnicas.CONCLUSIONES:La mayoría de los pacientes con cáncer de recto dependían de las derivaciones para seleccionar a su cirujano, y los que lo hacían tenían menos probabilidades de recibir cirugía en un hospital designado por el Instituto Nacional del Cáncer o en hospitales de gran volumen en comparación con los que consideraban la reputación. Se necesitan investigaciones a futuro para determinar el impacto de estos factores de decisión en los resultados clínicos, la satisfacción del paciente y la calidad de vida. Además, los pacientes deben ser conscientes de que depender de la remisión de un médico puede no resultar en el tratamiento más experimentado o integral en su área. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B897. (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).

Assessment of Textbook Oncologic Outcomes Following Proctectomy for Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Outcomes of rectal adenocarcinoma vary considerably. Composite "textbook oncologic outcome" (TOO) is a single metric that estimates optimal clinical performance for cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients with stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent single-agent neoadjuvant chemoradiation and proctectomy within 5-12 weeks were identified in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). TOO was defined as achievement of negative distal and circumferential resection margin (CRM), retrieval of ≥ 12 nodes, no 90-day mortality, and length of stay (LOS) < 75th percentile of corresponding year's range. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify predictors of TOO.

RESULTS

Among 318,225 patients, 8869 met selection criteria. Median age was 62 years (IQR 54-71), and 5550 (62.6%) were males. Low anterior resection was the most common procedure (LAR, 6,037 (68.1%) and 3084 (34.8%) were treated at a high-volume center (≥ 20 rectal resections/year). TOO was achieved in 3967 patients (44.7%). Several components of TOO were achieved commonly, including negative CRM (87.4%), no 90-day mortality (98.0%), no readmission (93.0%), and no prolonged hospitalization (78.8%). Logistic regression identified increasing age, non-private insurance, low-volume centers, open approach, Black race, Charlson score ≥ 3, and abdominoperineal resection (APR) as predictors of failure to achieve TOO. Over time, TOOs were attained more commonly which correlated with increased minimally invasive surgery (MIS) adoption. TOO achievement was associated with improved survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Rectal adenocarcinoma patients achieve TOO uncommonly. Treatment at high-volume centers and MIS approach were among modifiable factors associated with TOO in this study.

Impact of Age on Multimodality Treatment and Survival in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients

Background: Optimal treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer is neoadjuvant (chemo)radiation followed by radical surgery. This is challenging in the aging population because of frequently concomitant comorbidity. We analyzed whether age below and above 70 years is associated with differences in treatment strategy and outcome in this population-based study. Methods: Data between 2008 and 2016 were extracted from the Netherlands Cancer Registry with follow-up until 2021. Differences in therapy, referral and outcome were analyzed using χ2 tests, multivariable logistic regression and relative survival analysis. Results: In total, 6524 locally advanced rectal cancer patients were included. A greater proportion of patients <70 years underwent resection compared to older patients (89% vs. 71%). Patients ≥70 years were more likely treated with neoadjuvant radiotherapy (OR 3.4, 95% CI 2.61−4.52), than with chemoradiation (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.23−0.37) and less often referred to higher volume hospitals for resection (OR 0.7, 95% CI 0.51−0.87). Five-year relative survival after resection following neoadjuvant therapy was comparable and higher for both patients <70 years and ≥70 years (82% and 77%) than after resection only. Resection only was associated with worse survival in the elderly compared to younger patients (56% vs. 75%). Conclusion: Elderly patients with locally advanced rectal cancer received less intensive treatment and were less often referred to higher volume hospitals for surgery. Relative survival was good and comparable after optimal treatment in both age groups. Effort is necessary to improve guideline adherence, and multimodal strategies should be tailored to age, comorbidity and performance status.

The Impact of Commission on Cancer Accreditation Status, Hospital Rurality and Hospital Size on Quality Measure Performance Rates

BACKGROUND

Rural cancer patients receive lower-quality care and experience worse outcomes than urban patients. Commission on Cancer (CoC) accreditation requires hospitals to monitor performance on evidence-based quality measuresPlease confirm the list of authors is correc, but the impact of accreditation is not clear due to lack of data from non-accredited facilities and confounding between patient rurality and hospital accreditation, rurality, and size.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study assessed associations between rurality, accreditation, size, and performance rates for four CoC quality measures (breast radiation, breast chemotherapy, colon chemotherapy, colon nodal yield). Iowa Cancer Registry data were queried to identify all eligible patients diagnosed between 2011 and 2017. Cases were assigned to the surgery hospital to calculate performance rates. Univariate and multivariate regression models were fitted to identify patient- and hospital-level predictors and assess trends.

RESULTS

The study cohort included 10,381 patients; 46% were rural. Compared with urban patients, rural patients more often received treatment at small, rural, and non-accredited facilities (p < 0.001 for all). Rural hospitals had fewer beds and were far less likely to be CoC-accredited than urban hospitals (p < 0.001 for all). On multivariate analysis, CoC accreditation was the strongest, independent predictor of higher hospital performance for all quality measures evaluated (p < 0.05 in each model). Performance rates significantly improved over time only for the colon nodal yield quality measure, and only in urban hospitals.

CONCLUSIONS

CoC accreditation requires monitoring and evaluating performance on quality measures, which likely contributes to better performance on these measures. Efforts to support rural hospital accreditation may improve existing disparities in rural cancer treatment and outcomes.

Comparison of surgical outcomes for colostomy closure performed by acute care surgeons versus a dedicated colorectal surgery service

BACKGROUND

Despite colostomy closure being a common procedure, it remains highly morbid. Previous literature suggests that complication rates, including surgical site infections, intra-abdominal abscess, and anastomotic failures, reach as high as 50%. With the creation of a dedicated colorectal service, colostomy reversals have been largely migrated from the acute care surgery services. This study analyzes the differences in outcomes in colostomy closures performed between colorectal surgeons and acute care surgeons.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed our experience with 127 colostomy closures performed in our hospital system by acute care surgeons and colorectal surgeons from 2016 through 2020. Demographic data, operative data, and outcomes such as abscess formation, anastomotic leak, and readmission were analyzed. Multivariate regression analysis was performed for intraabdominal abscesses and anastomotic leaks.

RESULTS

In total, 71 colostomy closures were performed by colorectal surgeons (56%) and 56 by acute care surgeons (43%). The majority of colostomy reversals were after Hartmann's procedure for perforated diverticulitis. No differences in demographics were identified, except for a shorter interval to closure in the acute care surgeons group (10.0 vs 7.2 months; P = .049). Two (3.6%) acute care surgeon patients required colorectal surgeon consultation during the definitive repair. Regression analysis identified body mass index (odds ratio 2.43; P = .001), male gender (odds ratio -2.39; P = .18), and colorectal surgeons (odds ratio -2.28; P = .025) as significant risk factors for anastomotic leak.

CONCLUSION

Analysis of the current series identified female gender and increased body mass index as higher risk, while procedures performed by colorectal surgeons were at decreased risk for anastomotic leak. Our study identified colostomy reversals performed by a dedicated colorectal service decreased the rate of anastomotic leak.

Single Snapshot Imaging of Optical Properties (SSOP) for Perfusion Assessment during Gastric Conduit Creation for Esophagectomy: An Experimental Study on Pigs

Simple Summary

Anastomotic leak is the most dangerous complication occurring after esophagectomy and its relationship with inadequate visceral perfusion is widely recognized. Currently, the adequate perfusion of the gastric conduit is intraoperatively assessed by surgeons using subjective indicators (e.g., serosal color or pulsatile flow of vessels). During the last decades, several innovative optical techniques based on the interaction of light with tissue have been developed to monitor perfusion in esophagogastric surgery. However, these innovative approaches are characterized by a lack of video rate and reproducibility. They also provide operator-dependent results and lengthen the surgical workflow. Single Snapshot imaging of Optical Properties (SSOP) is an optical technique, which can overcome such limitations, providing quantitative information on the optical properties of biological tissues over a large field of view. It is the first study to demonstrate the accuracy of SSOP in the quantification of serosal StO₂% in a porcine gastric conduit model.

Abstract

Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a serious complication occurring after esophagectomy. The current knowledge suggests that inadequate intraoperative perfusion in the anastomotic site contributes to an increase in the AL rate. Presently, clinical estimation undertaken by surgeons is not accurate and new technology is necessary to improve the intraoperative assessment of tissue oxygenation. In the present study, we demonstrate the application of a novel optical technology, namely Single Snapshot imaging of Optical Properties (SSOP), used to quantify StO₂% in an open surgery experimental gastric conduit (GC) model. After the creation of a gastric conduit, local StO₂% was measured with a preclinical SSOP system for 60 min in the antrum (ROI-A), corpus (ROI-C), and fundus (ROI-F). The removed region (ROI-R) acted as ischemic control. ROI-R had statistically significant lower StO₂% when compared to all other ROIs at T15, T30, T45, and T60 (p < 0.0001). Local capillary lactates (LCLs) and StO₂% correlation was statistically significant (R = −0.8439, 95% CI −0.9367 to −0.6407, p < 0.0001). Finally, SSOP could discriminate resected from perfused regions and ROI-A from ROI-F (the future anastomotic site). In conclusion, SSOP could well be a suitable technology to assess intraoperative perfusion of GC, providing consistent StO₂% quantification and ROIs discrimination.

European Society of Gynaecological Oncology quality indicators for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Quality of surgical care as a crucial component of a comprehensive multi-disciplinary management improves outcomes in patients with endometrial carcinoma, notably helping to avoid suboptimal surgical treatment. Quality indicators (QIs) enable healthcare professionals to measure their clinical management with regard to ideal standards of care.

OBJECTIVE

In order to complete its set of QIs for the surgical management of gynecological cancers, the European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) initiated the development of QIs for the surgical treatment of endometrial carcinoma.

METHODS

QIs were based on scientific evidence and/or expert consensus. The development process included a systematic literature search for the identification of potential QIs and documentation of the scientific evidence, two consensus meetings of a group of international experts, an internal validation process, and external review by a large international panel of clinicians and patient representatives. QIs were defined using a structured format comprising metrics specifications, and targets. A scoring system was then developed to ensure applicability and feasibility of a future ESGO accreditation process based on these QIs for endometrial carcinoma surgery and support any institutional or governmental quality assurance programs.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine structural, process and outcome indicators were defined. QIs 1-5 are general indicators related to center case load, training, experience of the surgeon, structured multi-disciplinarity of the team and active participation in clinical research. QIs 6 and 7 are related to the adequate pre-operative investigations. QIs 8-22 are related to peri-operative standards of care. QI 23 is related to molecular markers for endometrial carcinoma diagnosis and as determinants for treatment decisions. QI 24 addresses the compliance of management of patients after primary surgical treatment with the standards of care. QIs 25-29 highlight the need for a systematic assessment of surgical morbidity and oncologic outcome as well as standardized and comprehensive documentation of surgical and pathological elements. Each QI was associated with a score. An assessment form including a scoring system was built as basis for ESGO accreditation of centers for endometrial cancer surgery.

Centralisation of rectal cancer care has improved patient survival in the republic of Ireland

BACKGROUND

Centralisation of rectal cancer surgery to designated centres was a key objective of the Irish national cancer control program. A national audit of rectal cancer surgery indicated centralisation was associated with improved early surgical outcomes. This study aimed to determine the impact of implementation of the national cancer strategy on survival from rectal cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were collected from the National Cancer Registry of Ireland to include all patients with Stage I-III rectal cancer undergoing rectal cancer surgery with curative intent between 2003 and 2012. Five-year overall survival and cancer-specific survival was compared between patients in the pre-centralisation (2003-2007) and post-centralisation period (2008-2012) and between patients receiving surgery in designated cancer centres and non-cancer centres.

RESULTS

The proportion of rectal cancer surgery performed in a designated cancer centre increased from 42% during 2003-2007 to 58% during 2008-2012. Five-year overall survival increased from 66.1% in 2003-2007 to 73.5% in 2008-2012 (p < 0.001). Five-year cancer-specific survival increased from 75.3% in 2003-2007 to 81.9% in 2008-2012 (p < 0.001). Surgery in a cancer centre and surgery post-centralisation were significantly associated with overall and cancer specific survival using Cox proportional hazards regression.

CONCLUSION

Survival following resection of rectal cancer was significantly improved following implementation of a national cancer strategy incorporating centralisation of rectal cancer surgery.

Hospital and Surgeon Selection for Medicare Beneficiaries With Stage II/III Rectal Cancer: The Role of Rurality, Distance to Care, and Colonoscopy Provider

OBJECTIVE

To determine factors associated with rectal cancer surgery performed at high-volume hospitals (HVHs) and by high-volume surgeons (HVSs), including the roles of rurality and diagnostic colonoscopy provider characteristics.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Although higher-volume hospitals/surgeons often achieve superior surgical outcomes, many rectal cancer resections are performed by lower-volume hospitals/surgeons, especially among rural populations.

METHODS

Patients age 66+ diagnosed from 2007 to 2011 with stage II/III primary rectal adenocarcinoma were selected from surveillance, epidemiology, and end results-medicare data. Patient ZIP codes were used to classify rural status. Hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine factors associated with surgery by HVH and HVS.

RESULTS

Of 1601 patients, 22% were rural and 78% were urban. Fewer rural patients received surgery at a HVH compared to urban patients (44% vs 65%; P < 0.0001). Compared to urban patients, rural patients more often had colonoscopies performed by general surgeons (and less often from gastroenterologists or colorectal surgeons), and lived substantially further from HVHs; these factors were both associated with lower odds of surgery at a HVH or by a HVS. In addition, whereas over half of both rural and urban patients received their colonoscopy and surgery at the same hospital, rural patients who stayed at the same hospital were significantly less likely to receive surgery at a HVH or by a HVS compared to urban patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Rural rectal cancer patients are less likely to receive surgery from a HVH/HVS. The role of the colonoscopy provider has important implications for referral patterns and initiatives seeking to increase centralization.

Center-Level Procedure Volume Does Not Predict Failure-to-Rescue After Severe Complications of Oncologic Colon and Rectal Surgery

Background

The relationship between hospital surgical volume and outcome after colorectal cancer surgery has thoroughly been studied. However, few studies have assessed hospital surgical volume and failure-to-rescue (FTR) after colon and rectal cancer surgery. The aim of the current study is to evaluate FTR following colorectal cancer surgery between clinics based on procedure volume.

Methods

Patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery in Sweden from January 2015 to January 2020 were recruited through the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The primary endpoint was FTR, defined as the proportion of patients with 30-day mortality after severe postoperative complications in colorectal cancer surgery. Severe postoperative complications were defined as Clavien–Dindo ≥ 3. FTR incidence rate ratios (IRR) were calculated comparing center volume stratified in low-volume (≤ 200 cases/year) and high-volume centers (> 200 cases/year), as well as with an alternative stratification comparing low-volume (< 50 cases/year), medium-volume (50–150 cases/year) and high-volume centers (> 150 cases/year).

Results

A total of 23,351 patients were included in this study, of whom 2964 suffered severe postoperative complication(s). Adjusted IRR showed no significant differences between high- and low-volume centers with an IRR of 0.97 (0.75–1.26, p = 0.844) in high-volume centers in the first stratification and an IRR of 2.06 (0.80–5.31, p = 0.134) for high-volume centers and 2.15 (0.83–5.56, p = 0.116) for medium-volume centers in the second stratification.

Conclusion

This nationwide retrospectively analyzed cohort study fails to demonstrate a significant association between hospital surgical volume and FTR after colorectal cancer surgery. Future studies should explore alternative characteristics and their correlation with FTR to identify possible interventions for the improvement of quality of care after colorectal cancer surgery.

Local recurrence with intersphincteric resection in adverse histology rectal cancers. A retrospective study with competing risk analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety of inter-sphincteric resection (ISR) for low rectal cancer with adverse histologic subtypes has been incompletely studied. The present study aims at determining the risk of local recurrence with this procedure in poorly differentiated and signet ring cell (PDSR) adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis from a single tertiary cancer centre of non-metastatic primary rectal cancer <6 cm from the anal verge that underwent ISR. Competing risk analysis and sub-distribution hazard ratios for local recurrence free survivals were calculated to determine factors that influenced local recurrence with the competing risk of death from any cause to overcome the exceeding risk of distant metastasis associated with adverse histologic types.

RESULTS

One hundred forty-two patients underwent ISR and 22.6% has PDSR histology. At a median follow up of 61 months, 15.6% of the PDSR cohort developed local recurrence (five patients) compared to 11.7% in the non-PDSR group. PDSR histology influenced overall and disease free survival but not local recurrence on cox regression. On competing risk analysis, only ypT stage ≥3 predicted worse local recurrence free survival and not histology.

CONCLUSIONS

The presence of PDSR histology did not increase the risk of local recurrence after ISR in this retrospective competing risk analysis.

Hospital variation in sphincter-preservation rates in rectal cancer treatment: results of a population-based study in the Netherlands

Background

This study aimed to examine the sphincter-preservation rate variations in rectal cancer surgery. The influence of hospital volume on sphincter-preservation rates and short-term outcomes (anastomotic leakage (AL), positive circumferential resection margin (CRM), 30- and 90-day mortality rates) were also analysed.

Methods

Non-metastasized rectal cancer patients treated between 2009 and 2016 were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Surgical procedures were divided into sphincter-preserving surgery and an end colostomy group. Multivariable logistic regression models were generated to estimate the probability of undergoing sphincter-preserving surgery according to the hospital of surgery and tumour height (low, 5 cm or less, mid, more than 5 cm to 10 cm, and high, more than 10 cm). The influence of annual hospital volume (less than 20, 20–39, more than 40 resections) on sphincter-preservation rate and short-term outcomes was also examined.

Results

A total of 20 959 patients were included (11 611 sphincter preservation and 8079 end colostomy) and the observed median sphincter-preservation rate in low, mid and high rectal cancer was 29.3, 75.6 and 87.9 per cent respectively. After case-mix adjustment, hospital of surgery was a significant factor for patients’ likelihood for sphincter preservation in all three subgroups (P < 0.001). In mid rectal cancer, borderline higher rates of sphincter preservation were associated with low-volume hospitals (odds ratio 1.20, 95 per cent c.i. 1.01 to 1.43). No significant association between annual hospital volume and sphincter-preservation rate in low and high rectal cancer nor short-term outcomes (AL, positive CRM rate and 30- and 90-day mortality rates) was identified.

Conclusion

This population-based study showed a significant hospital variation in sphincter-preservation rates in rectal surgery. The annual hospital volume, however, was not associated with sphincter-preservation rates in low, and high rectal cancer nor with other short-term outcomes.

Thyroid and parathyroid surgeon case volume influences patient outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

The study aim was to systematically review literature evaluating surgeon volume-outcome relationships for thyroid and parathyroid operations in order to inform surgical quality improvement initiatives. Current literature suggests surgeons who perform a high volume of thyroid and/or parathyroid operations have better outcomes than low volume surgeons, though specific volume definition are not standardized.

METHODS

Eligible studies were selected through a literature search focused on the effect of surgeon volume on thyroid and parathyroid surgery patient outcomes. The literature search was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Publication dates extended from January 1998 to February 2021, and were limited to articles published in English.

RESULTS

A total of 33 studies were included: 25 studies evaluating thyroid surgery outcomes, 4 studies evaluating parathyroid surgery outcomes, and 4 studies evaluating both thyroid and parathyroid (mixed) surgery outcomes. Higher volume thyroid and parathyroid surgeons were found to be associated with fewer surgical and medical complications, shorter length of hospital stay, and reduced total cost when compared to lower volume surgeons. This volume-outcome relationship was also found to specifically affect the complication and recurrence rates for thyroid cancer patients undergoing surgery, especially for individuals with advanced stage disease.

CONCLUSION

The heterogeneity in cut-offs used for characterizing surgeons as high versus low volume, and also in subsequent patient outcome measures, limited direct study comparisons. The trend of improved patient outcomes with higher surgeon volume for both thyroid and parathyroid surgeries was consistently present in all studies reviewed.

Anastomotic leak risk in complete responders to neoadjuvant therapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review

PURPOSE

The oncological benefits of achieving a complete pathological response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer are well defined. How a pathological response affects anastomotic healing or leak rates is not clear. The aim of this systematic review was to compare anastomotic leak rates among patients who did and did not achieve a complete pathological response.

METHODS

Three major databases (PubMed, Embase, and Scopus) were searched. Predetermined inclusion criteria included prospective and retrospective articles published in English reporting complete pathological response and anastomotic leak rates following total mesorectal excision in ≥ 30 patients with rectal cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision. The primary outcomes measured included complete pathological response and 30-day postoperative morbidity.

RESULTS

From a total of 8919 patients with rectal cancer in 7 studies, 4165 fulfilled the criteria for inclusion. The majority (> 80%) of patients had clinical stage II or III disease. A defunctioning loop ileostomy was formed in 76.5%. A total of 589 (14.1%) patients achieved a pCR of whom 63 (10.7%) developed an anastomotic leak compared to 272/3576 (7.6%) patients without a pCR (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Patients with complete pathological response following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and total mesorectal excision may be at higher risk of anastomotic leak than incomplete responders. This may need to be taken into account when counseling patients about the relative risks of organ preservation versus anterior resection.

Hospital academic status is associated with failure-to-rescue after colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

Failure-to-rescue is a quality indicator measuring the response to postoperative complications. The current study aims to compare failure-to-rescue in patients suffering severe complications after surgery for colorectal cancer between hospitals based on their university status.

METHODS

Patients undergoing colorectal cancer surgery from January 2015 to January 2020 in Sweden were included through the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry in the current study. Severe postoperative complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo ≥3. Failure-to-rescue incidence rate ratios were calculated comparing university versus nonuniversity hospitals.

RESULTS

A total of 23,351 patients were included in this study, of whom 2,964 suffered severe postoperative complication(s). University hospitals had lower failure-to-rescue rates with an incidence rate ratios of 0.62 (0.46-0.84, P = .002) compared with nonuniversity hospitals. There were significantly lower failure-to-rescue rates in almost all types of severe postoperative complications at university than nonuniversity hospitals.

CONCLUSION

University hospitals have a lower risk for failure-to-rescue compared with nonuniversity hospitals. The exact mechanisms behind this finding are unknown and warrant further investigation to identify possible improvements that can be applied to all hospitals.

The volume-outcome relationship in robotic protectectomy: does center volume matter? Results of a national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Utilization of robotic proctectomy (RP) for rectal cancer has steadily increased since the inception of robotic surgery in 2002. Randomized control trials evaluating the safety of RP are in process to better understand the role of robotic assistance in proctectomy. This study aimed to characterize the trends in the use of RP for rectal cancer, and to compare oncologic outcomes with center-level RP volume.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

8107 patients with rectal adenocarcinoma who underwent RP were identified in the National Cancer Database (2010-2015). Logistic regression was used to evaluate associations between center-level volume and conversion to open proctectomy, margin status, lymph node yield, 30- and 90-day post-operative mortality, and overall survival.

RESULTS

The utilization of RP increased from 2010 to 2015. On multivariate regression, lower center-level volume of RP was associated with significantly higher rates of conversion to open, positive margins, inadequate lymph node harvest (≥ 12), and lower overall survival. The present study was limited by its retrospective design and lack of information regarding disease-specific survival.

CONCLUSIONS

This series suggests a volume-outcome relationship association; patients who have robot-assisted proctectomies performed at low-volume centers are more likely to have poorer overall survival, positive margins, inadequate lymph node harvest, and require conversion to open surgery. While these data demonstrate the increased adoption of robot-assisted proctectomy, an understanding of the appropriateness of this intervention is still lacking. As with any new intervention, further information from ongoing randomized controlled trials is needed to better clarify the role of RP in order to optimize patient outcomes.

Mortality and complication management after surgery for colorectal cancer depending on the DKG minimum amounts for hospital volume

BACKGROUND

The German Cancer Society ("Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft"; DKG) certifies on a volunteer base colorectal cancer centers based on, among other things, minimum operative amounts (at least 30 oncological colon cancer resections and 20 oncological rectal cancer resections per year). In this work, nationwide hospital mortality and death after documented complications ('Failure to Rescue' = FtR) were evaluated depending on the fulfillment of the minimum amounts.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of the nationwide hospital billing data (DRG data, 2012-2017). Categorization is based on the DKG minimum quantities (fully, partially or not fulfilled).

RESULTS

Of 287,227 patients analyzed, 56.5% were operated in centers that met the DKG minimum amounts. The overall hospital mortality rate was 5.0%. In centers which met the minimum quantities, it was significantly lower (4.3%) than in hospitals which partially (5.7%) or not (6.2%) met the minimum quantities. The risk-adjusted hospital mortality rate for patients in hospitals who meet the minimum amount was 20% lower (OR 0.80; 95% CI [0.74-0.87], p < 0.001). For complications, both surgical and non-surgical, there was an unadjusted and adjusted lower FtR in hospitals that met the minimum amounts (e.g. anastomotic leak: 11.2% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001; pulmonary artery embolism 21.3% vs. 28.2%, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSION

There is a 1/3 lower mortality and FtR rate after surgery for a colon or rectal cancer in centers fulfilling the DKG minimum amounts. The presented data implicate that there is an urgent need for a nationwide centralization program.

Quantification of fluorescence angiography: Toward a reliable intraoperative assessment of tissue perfusion - A narrative review

BACKGROUND

Accurate intraoperative assessments of tissue perfusion are essential in all forms of surgery. As traditional methods of perfusion assessments are not available during minimally invasive surgery, novel methods are required. Here, fluorescence angiography with indocyanine green has shown promising results. However, to secure objective and reproducible assessments, quantification of the fluorescent signal is essential (Q-ICG). This narrative review aims to provide an overview of the current status and applicability of Q-ICG for intraoperative perfusion assessment.

RESULTS

Both commercial and custom Q-ICG software solutions are available for intraoperative use; however, most studies on Q-ICG have performed post-operative analyses. Q-ICG can be divided into inflow parameters (ttp, t0, slope, and T_1/2max) and intensity parameters (Fmax, PI, and DR). The intensity parameters appear unreliable in clinical settings. In comparison, inflow parameters, mainly slope, and T_1/2max have had superior clinical performance.

CONCLUSION

Intraoperative Q-ICG is clinically available; however, only feasibility studies have been performed, rendering an excellent usability score. Q-ICG in a post-operative setting could detect changes in perfusion following a range of interventions and reflect clinical endpoints, but only if based on inflow parameters. Thus, future studies should include the methodology outlined in this review, emphasizing the use of inflow parameters (slope or T_1/2max), a mass-adjusted ICG dosing, and a fixed camera position.

International variation in managing locally advanced or recurrent rectal cancer: prospective benchmark analysis

BACKGROUND

Tumour extension beyond the mesorectal plane (ymrT4) occurs in 5-10 per cent of patients with rectal cancer and 10 per cent of patients develop locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) after primary surgery. There is global variation in healthcare delivery for these conditions.

METHODS

An international benchmark trial of the management of ymrT4 tumours and LRRC was undertaken in France and Australia between 2015 and 2017. Heterogeneity in management and operative decision-making were analysed by comparison of surgical resection rates, blinded intercountry reading of pelvic MRI, quality-of-life assessment and qualitative evaluations.

RESULTS

Among 154 patients (97 in France and 57 in Australia), 31·8 per cent had ymrT4 disease and 68·2 per cent LRRC. The surgical resection rates were 88 and 79 per cent in France and Australia respectively (P = 0·112). The concordance in operative planning was low (κ = 0·314); the rate of pelvic exenteration was lower in France than Australia both in clinical practice (36 of 78 versus 34 of 40; P < 0·001) and in theoretical conditions (10 of 25 versus 50 of 57; P = 0·002). The R0 resection rate was lower in France than Australia for LRRC (25 of 49 versus 18 of 21; P = 0·007) but not for ymrT4 tumours (21 of 26 versus 15 of 15; P = 0·139). Morbidity rates were similar. Patients who underwent non-exenterative procedures had higher scores on the mental functioning subscale at 12 months (P = 0·047), and a lower level of distress at 6 months (P = 0·049). Qualitative analysis highlighted five categories of psychosocial factors influencing treatment decisions: patient, strategy, specialist, organization and culture.

CONCLUSION

This international benchmark trial has highlighted the differences in worldwide treatment of locally advanced and LRRC. Standardized care should improve outcomes for these patients.

Nationwide in-hospital mortality rate following rectal resection for rectal cancer according to annual hospital volume in Germany

Background

The impact of hospital volume after rectal cancer surgery is seldom investigated. This study aimed to analyse the impact of annual rectal cancer surgery cases per hospital on postoperative mortality and failure to rescue.

Methods

All patients diagnosed with rectal cancer and who had a rectal resection procedure code from 2012 to 2015 were identified from nationwide administrative hospital data. Hospitals were grouped into five quintiles according to caseload. The absolute number of patients, postoperative deaths and failure to rescue (defined as in‐hospital mortality after a documented postoperative complication) for severe postoperative complications were determined.

Results

Some 64 349 patients were identified. The overall in‐house mortality rate was 3·9 per cent. The crude in‐hospital mortality rate ranged from 5·3 per cent in very low‐volume hospitals to 2·6 per cent in very high‐volume centres, with a distinct trend between volume categories (P < 0·001). In multivariable logistic regression analysis using hospital volume as random effect, very high‐volume hospitals (53 interventions/year) had a risk‐adjusted odds ratio of 0·58 (95 per cent c.i. 0·47 to 0·73), compared with the baseline in‐house mortality rate in very low‐volume hospitals (6 interventions per year) (P < 0·001). The overall postoperative complication rate was comparable between different volume quintiles, but failure to rescue decreased significantly with increasing caseload (15·6 per cent after pulmonary embolism in the highest volume quintile versus 38 per cent in the lowest quintile; P = 0·010).

Conclusion

Patients who had rectal cancer surgery in high‐volume hospitals showed better outcomes and reduced failure to rescue rates for severe complications than those treated in low‐volume hospitals.

Evidence according to Cochrane Systematic Reviews on Alterable Risk Factors for Anastomotic Leakage in Colorectal Surgery

Anastomotic leakage reflects a major problem in visceral surgery, leading to increased morbidity, mortality, and costs. This review is aimed at evaluating and summarizing risk factors for colorectal anastomotic leakage. A generalized discussion first introduces risk factors beginning with nonalterable factors. Focus is then brought to alterable impact factors on colorectal anastomoses, utilizing Cochrane systematic reviews assessed via systemic literature search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Medline until May 2019. Seventeen meta-anaylses covering 20 factors were identified. Thereof, 7 factors were preoperative, 10 intraoperative, and 3 postoperative. Three factors significantly reduced the incidence of anastomotic leaks: high (versus low) surgeon's operative volume (RR = 0.68), stapled (versus handsewn) ileocolic anastomosis (RR = 0.41), and a diverting ostomy in anterior resection for rectal carcinoma (RR = 0.32). Discussion of all alterable factors is made in the setting of the pre-, intra-, and postoperative influencers, with the only significant preoperative risk modifier being a high colorectal volume surgeon and the only significant intraoperative factors being utilizing staples in ileocolic anastomoses and a diverting ostomy in rectal anastomoses. There were no measured postoperative alterable factors affecting anastomotic integrity.

State-wide outcomes in elective rectal cancer resection: is there a case for centralization in Victoria?

BACKGROUND

The role of service centralization in rectal cancer surgery is controversial. Recent studies suggest centralization to high-volume centres may improve postoperative mortality. We used a state-wide administrative data set to determine the inpatient mortality for patients undergoing elective rectal cancer surgery and to compare individual hospital volumes.

METHODS

The Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset was explored using the Dr Foster Quality Investigator tool. The inpatient mortality rate, 30-day readmission rate and the proportion of patients with increased length of stay were measured for all elective admissions for rectal cancer resections between 2012 and 2016. A peer group of 14 hospitals were studied using funnel plots to determine inter-hospital variation in mortality. Procedure types were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

There were 2241 elective resections performed for rectal cancer in Victoria over 4 years. The crude inpatient mortality rate was 1.1%. There were no significant differences in mortality among 14 hospitals within the peer group. The number of elective resections over 4 years ranged from 14 to 136 (median 65) within these institutions. Ultralow anterior resection was the commonest procedure performed.

CONCLUSION

Inpatient mortality after elective rectal cancer surgery in Victoria is rare and compares favourably internationally. Based on inpatient mortality alone, there is no compelling evidence to further centralize elective rectal cancer surgery in Victoria. More work is needed to develop data sets with oncological information capable of providing accurate complete state-wide data which will be essential for future service planning, training and innovation.

Overcoming a travel burden to high-volume centers for treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas is associated with improved survival

Background

Guidelines recommend treatment of retroperitoneal sarcomas (RPS) at high-volume centers. However, high-volume centers may not be accessible locally. This national study compared outcomes of RPS resection between local low-volume centers and more distant high-volume centers.

Methods

Patients treated for RPS were identified from the National Cancer Database (1998–2012). Travel distance and annual hospital volume were divided into quartiles. Two groups were identified: (1) short travel to low-volume hospitals (ST/LV), (2) long travel to high-volume hospitals (LT/HV). Outcomes were adjusted for clinical, tumor, and treatment characteristics.

Results

Two thousand five hundred ninety-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. The LT/HV cohort was younger and more often white (p < 0.01). The LT/HV group had more comorbidities, higher tumor grade, and more often radical resections and radiotherapy (all p < 0.05). The ST/LV group underwent significantly more R2 resections (4.4% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.003). Thirty-day mortality was significantly lower in the LT/HV group (1.2% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.0026). Five-year survival was better among the LT/HV group (63% vs. 53%, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, the LT/HV group had a 27% improvement in overall survival (HR 0.73, p = 0.0009).

Conclusions

This national study suggests that traveling to high-volume centers for the treatment of RPS confers a significant short-term and long-term survival advantage, supporting centralized care for RPS.

Locally recurrent rectal cancer: what the radiologist should know

Despite advances in surgical techniques and chemoradiation therapy, recurrent rectal cancer remains a cause of morbidity and mortality. After successful treatment of rectal cancer, patients are typically enrolled in a surveillance strategy that includes imaging as studies have shown improved prognosis when recurrent rectal cancer is detected during imaging surveillance versus based on development of symptoms. Additionally, patients who experience a complete clinical response with chemoradiation therapy may elect to enroll in a "watch-and-wait" strategy that includes imaging surveillance rather than surgical resection. Factors that increase the likelihood of recurrence, patterns of recurrence, and the imaging appearances of recurrent rectal cancer are reviewed with a focus on CT, PET CT, and MR imaging.

Surgeon perceived most important factors to achieve the best hospital performance on colorectal cancer surgery: a Dutch modified Delphi method

OBJECTIVES

Hospital variation in risk-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery has been shown. However, explanatory factors are not sufficiently clear. The objective of this study was to identify factors perceived by gastrointestinal surgeons as important to achieve excellent casemix-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery.

DESIGN

Based on literature and experts' opinion, 86 factors associated with serious complications, failure to rescue and mortality were listed. These were presented to gastrointestinal surgeons through two web-based surveys and an expert meeting. Participants were asked to choose their top 10 of most important factors.

PARTICIPANTS

Dutch gastrointestinal surgeons (n=52) of different hospitals and different hospital types (general/teaching/academic).

RESULTS

Of 31 invited experts for the first survey and meeting, 71% responded. Of 130 invited surgeons, 34 responded to the second survey. Factors deemed important were: procedural hospital volume (46% in top 10), specialised surgeons performing surgery, (elective 87%, emergency 60% and reoperations 62% in top 10), accessibility of, and daily ward rounds by specialised surgeons (41% and 38% in top 10), preoperative screening for malnutrition (57% in top 10), a protocol for recognition of anastomotic leakage and rapid reintervention (54% and 49% in top 10).

CONCLUSION

Procedural hospital volume, specialisation of surgeons, screening for malnutrition, early recognition of complications followed by rapid action were perceived as most important factors to achieve good outcomes by gastrointestinal surgeons.