International evaluation of circumferential resection margins after rectal cancer resection: insights from the Swedish and Dutch audits

Risk factors for local recurrence of rectal cancer after curative surgery: A single-center retrospective study

PURPOSE

Approximately 7% of patients with rectal cancer experience local recurrence within 5 years of curative surgery. A positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) is among the most significant risk factors. Other reported risk factors include histopathologic type, anastomotic leakage, positive distal margins, and more recently, the anterior localization of the tumor. In this retrospective cohort study, we aimed to assess risk factors for local recurrence in our institution, with a focus on tumor localization as an independent negative predictive factor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From 2007 to 2018, all patients with stage II or III rectal cancer were included in this study. Patients underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by surgical resection with total mesorectal excision. The tumor's anterior or posterior localization was assessed by preoperative endosonography or magnetic resonance imaging. Risk factors for local recurrence were assessed using univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 128 patients were included. The 3-year and 5-year local recurrence rates were 4.7% and 7%, respectively. In univariate and multivariate analyses, the histologic type of a poorly differentiated tumor (P=0.001) and a positive CRM (P=0.001) were correlated with local recurrence. Tumor localization (anterior or posterior) was not identified as a statistically significant factor associated with local recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Positive CRM and a poorly differentiated tumor histological subtype were found to be independent risk factors for local recurrence. In contrast to previous findings, anterior localization was not identified as an independent risk factor for local recurrence in our patient cohort.

Evolution of surgical approach to rectal cancer resection: A multinational registry assessment

PURPOSE

Surgical approach to rectal cancer has evolved in recent decades, with introduction of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques and local excision. Since implementation might differ internationally, this study is aimed at evaluating trends in surgical approach to rectal cancer across different countries over the last 10 years and to gain insight into patient, tumour and treatment characteristics.

METHODS

Pseudo-anonymised data of patients undergoing resection for rectal cancer between 2010 and 2019 were extracted from clinical audits in the Netherlands (NL), Sweden (SE), England-Wales (EW) and Australia-New Zealand (AZ).

RESULTS

Ninety-nine thousand five hundred ninety-seven patients were included (38,413 open, 55,155 MIS and 5416 local excision). An overall increase in MIS was observed from 29.9% in 2010 to 72.1% in 2019, with decreasing conversion rates (17.5-9.0%). The MIS proportion was highly variable between countries in the period 2010-2014 (54.4% NL, 45.3% EW, 39.8% AZ, 14.1% SE, P < 0.001), but variation reduced over time (2015-2019 78.8% NL, 66.3% EW, 64.3% AZ, 53.2% SE, P < 0.001). The proportion of local excision for the two periods was highly variable between countries: 4.7% and 11.8% in NL, 3.9% and 7.4% in EW, 4.7% and 4.6% in AZ, 6.0% and 2.9% in SE.

CONCLUSIONS

Application and speed of implementation of MIS were highly variable between countries, but each registry demonstrated a significant increase over time. Local excision revealed inconsistent trends over time.

Beyond Total Mesorectal Excision (TME)-Results of MRI-Guided Multivisceral Resections in T4 Rectal Carcinoma and Local Recurrence

Rectal cancer invading adjacent organs (T4) and locally recurrent rectal cancer (LRRC) pose a special challenge for surgical resection. We investigate the diagnostic performance of MRI and the results that can be achieved with MRI-guided surgery. All consecutive patients who underwent MRI-based multivisceral resection for T4 rectal adenocarcinoma or LRRC between 2005 and 2019 were included. Pelvic MRI findings were reviewed according to a seven-compartment staging system and correlated with histopathology. Outcomes were investigated by comparing T4 tumors and LRRC with respect to cause-specific survival in uni- and multivariate analysis. We identified 48 patients with T4 tumors and 28 patients with LRRC. Overall, 529 compartments were assessed with an accuracy of 81.7%, a sensitivity of 88.6%, and a specificity of 79.2%. Understaging was as low as 3.0%, whereas overstaging was 15.3%. The median number of resected compartments was 3 (interquartile range 3-4) for T4 tumors and 4 (interquartile range 3-5) for LRRC (p = 0.017). In 93.8% of patients with T4 tumors, a histopathologically complete (R0(local)-) resection could be achieved compared to 57.1% in LRRC (p < 0.001). Five-year overall survival for patients with T4 tumors was 53.3% vs. 32.1% for LRRC (p = 0.085). R0-resection and M0-category emerged as independent prognostic factors, whereas the number of resected compartments was not associated with prognosis in multivariate analysis. MRI predicts compartment involvement with high accuracy and especially avoids understaging. Surgery based on MRI yields excellent loco-regional results for T4 tumors and good results for LRRC. The number of resected compartments is not independently associated with prognosis, but R0-resection remains the crucial surgical factor.

National differences in implementation of minimally invasive surgery for colorectal cancer and the influence on short-term outcomes

Background

The timing and degree of implementation of minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal cancer vary among countries. Insights in national differences regarding implementation of new surgical techniques and the effect on postoperative outcomes are important for quality assurance, can show potential areas for country-specific improvement, and might be illustrative and supportive for similar implementation programs in other countries. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate differences in patient selection, applied techniques, and results of minimal invasive surgery for colorectal cancer between the Netherlands and Sweden.

Methods

Patients who underwent elective minimally invasive surgery for T1-3 colon or rectal cancer (2012–2018) registered in the Dutch ColoRectal Audit or Swedish ColoRectal Cancer Registry were included. Time trends in the application of MIS were determined. Outcomes were compared for time periods with a similar level of MIS implementation (Netherlands 2012–2013 versus Sweden 2017–2018). Multilevel analyses were performed to identify factors associated with adverse short-term outcomes.

Results

A total of 46,095 Dutch and 8,819 Swedish patients undergoing MIS for colorectal cancer were included. In Sweden, MIS implementation was approximately 5 years later than in the Netherlands, with more robotic surgery and lower volumes per hospital. Although conversion rates were higher in Sweden, oncological and surgical outcomes were comparable. MIS in the Netherlands for the years 2012–2013 resulted in a higher reoperation rate for colon cancer and a higher readmission rate but lower non-surgical complication rates for rectal cancer if compared with MIS in Sweden during 2017–2018.

Conclusion

This study showed that the implementation of MIS for colorectal cancer occurred later in Sweden than the Netherlands, with comparable outcomes despite lower volumes. Our study demonstrates that new surgical techniques can be implemented at a national level in a controlled and safe way, with thorough quality assurance.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08974-1.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVE

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

DESIGN

This is a nationwide observational comparative registry study.

SETTINGS

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

PATIENTS

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

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

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

RESULTS

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

LIMITATIONS

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

CONCLUSION

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

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

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

Predictors of Positive Circumferential Resection Margin in Rectal Cancer: A Current Audit of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Positive circumferential resection margin is a predictor of local recurrence and worse survival in rectal cancer. National programs aimed to improve rectal cancer outcomes were first created in 2011 and continue to evolve. The impact on circumferential resection margin during this time frame has not been fully evaluated in the United States.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence and predictors of positive circumferential resection margin after rectal cancer resection, across patient, provider, and tumor characteristics.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted using the National Cancer Database, 2011-2016.

PATIENTS

Adults who underwent proctectomy for pathologic stage I to III rectal adenocarcinoma were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Rate and predictors of positive circumferential resection margin, defined as resection margin ≤1 mm, were measured.

RESULTS

Of 52,620 cases, circumferential resection margin status was reported in 90% (n = 47,331) and positive in 18.4% (n = 8719). Unadjusted analysis showed that patients with positive circumferential resection margin were more often men, had public insurance and shorter travel, underwent total proctectomy via open and robotic approaches, and were treated in Southern and Western regions at integrated cancer networks (all p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis noted that positive proximal and/or distal margin on resected specimen had the strongest association with positive circumferential resection margin (OR = 15.6 (95% CI, 13.6-18.1); p < 0.001). Perineural invasion, total proctectomy, robotic approach, neoadjuvant chemoradiation, integrated cancer network, advanced tumor size and grade, and Black race had increased risk of positive circumferential resection margin (all p < 0.050). Laparoscopic approach, surgery in North, South, and Midwest regions, greater hospital volume and travel distance, lower T-stage, and higher income were associated with decreased risk (all p < 0.028).

LIMITATIONS

This was a retrospective cohort study with limited variables available for analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite creation of national initiatives, positive circumferential resection margin rate remains an alarming 18.4%. The persistently high rate with predictors of positive circumferential resection margin identified calls for additional education, targeted quality improvement assessments, and publicized auditing to improve rectal cancer care in the United States. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584.

PREDICTORES PARA UN MARGEN POSITIVO DE RESECCIN CIRCUNFERENCIAL EN EL CNCER DE RECTO UNA AUDITORA VIGENTE DE LA BASE DE DATOS NACIONAL DE CANCER

ANTECEDENTES:El margen positivo de resección circunferencial es un predictor de recurrencia local y peor sobrevida en el cáncer de recto. Los programas nacionales destinados a mejorar los resultados del cáncer de recto se crearon por primera vez en 2011 y continúan evolucionando. La repercusión del margen de resección circunferencial durante este período de tiempo no se ha evaluado completamente en los Estados Unidos.OBJETIVO:Determinar la incidencia y los predictores para un margen positivo de resección circunferencial posterior a la resección del cáncer de recto, según las características del paciente, el proveedor y el tumor.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.AMBITO:Base de datos nacional de cáncer, 2011-2016.PACIENTES:Adultos que se sometieron a proctectomía por adenocarcinoma de recto con un estadío por patología I-III.PRINCIPALES VARIABLES EVALUADAS:Tasa y predictores para un margen positivo de resección circunferencial, definido como margen de resección ≤ 1 mm.RESULTADOS:De 52,620 casos, la condición del margen de resección circunferencial se informó en el 90% (n = 47,331) y positivo en el 18.4% (n = 8,719). El análisis no ajustado mostró que los pacientes con margen positivo de resección circunferencial se presentó con mayor frecuencia en hombres, tenían un seguro social y viajes más cortos, se operaron de proctectomía total abierta y robótica, y fueron tratados en las regiones del sur y el oeste en redes integradas de cáncer (todos p <0,001). El análisis multivariado destacó que el margen proximal y / o distal positivo de la pieza resecada tenía la asociación más fuerte con el margen postivo de resección circunferencial (OR 15,6; IC del 95%: 13,6-18,1, p <0,001). La invasión perineural, la proctectomía total, el abordaje robótico, la quimioradioterapia neoadyuvante, la red de cáncer integrada, el tamaño y grado del tumor avanzado y la raza afroamericana tenían un mayor riesgo de un margen de una resección positiva circunferencial (todos p <0,050). El abordaje laparoscópico, la cirugía en las regiones Norte, Sur y Medio Oeste, un mayor volumen hospitalario y distancia de viaje, estadio T más bajo y mayores ingresos se asociaron con una disminución del riesgo (todos p <0,028).LIMITACIONES:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo con variables limitadas disponibles para análisis.CONCLUSIONES:A pesar del establecimiento de iniciativas nacionales, la tasa de margen positivo de resección circunferencial continúa siendo alarmante, 18,4%. El índice continuamente elevado junto a los predictores de un margen positivo de resección circunferencial hace un llamado para una mayor educación, evaluaciones específicas de mejora de la calidad y difusión de las auditorías para mejorar la atención del cáncer de recto en los Estados Unidos. Vea el resumen de video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B584.

Association of certification, improved quality and better oncological outcomes for rectal cancer in a specialized colorectal unit

PURPOSE

Centralization of cancer care is expected to yield superior results. In Germany, the national strategy is based on a voluntary certification process. The effect of centre certification is difficult to prove because quality data are rarely available prior to certification. This observational study aims to assess outcomes for rectal cancer patients before and after implementation of a certified cancer centre.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All consecutive patients treated for rectal cancer in our certified centre from 2009 to 2017 were retrieved from a prospective database. The dataset was analyzed according to a predefined set of 19 quality indicators comprising 36 quality goals. The results were compared to an identical cohort of patients, treated from 2000 to 2008 just before centre implementation.

RESULTS

In total, 1059 patients were included, 481 in the 2009-2017 interval and 578 in the 2000-2008 interval. From 2009 to 2017, 25 of 36 quality goals were achieved (vs. 19/36). The proportion of anastomotic leaks in low anastomoses was improved (13.5% vs. 22.1%, p = 0.018), as was the local 5-year recurrence rate for stage (y)pIII rectal cancers (7.7% vs. 17.8%, p = 0.085), and quality of mesorectal excision (0.3% incomplete resections vs. 5.5%, p = 0.002). Furthermore, a decrease of abdominoperineal excisions was noted (47.1% vs. 60.0%, p = 0.037). For the 2009-2017 interval, local 5-year recurrence rate in stages (y)p0-III was 4.6% and 5-year overall survival was 80.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Certification as specialized centre and regular audits were associated with an improvement of various quality parameters. The formal certification process has the potential to enhance quality of care for rectal cancer patients.

Extended Total Mesorectal Excision (e-TME) for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) can involve surrounding pelvic organs requiring multivisceral resection. Extended total mesorectal excision (e-TME) or multivisceral resection is a complex procedure associated with high morbidity, mortality, and R1 resection rates. However, e-TME in LARC with surrounding organ involvement is the only potential option for cure. The study aims to assess the clinical outcome of patients requiring e-TME for LARC.

METHODS

The study is a retrospective review of all patients with LARC requiring multivisceral resection (2013 to 2019). The database includes clinic-demographic profile, pelvic organ involved, operative details, resection margin status, morbidity, mortality, and survival.

RESULTS

Seven consecutive patients (9.2%) out of 76 LARC (median age 46 years; 5 females) required multivisceral resection. The organs involved were bladder (4); posterior wall of vagina (2); and uterus (1). The en bloc resection included total cystoprostatectomy - 1; partial cystectomy - 3; posterior vaginectomy - 2; and hysterectomy - 1. Additionally, four required abdominoperineal resection. All were adenocarcinoma: stage III, with R0 resection - 76%. The overall complications were seen in 60% of patients, majority being wound related. There was no operative mortality. The median survival was 32.2 months in the entire series, while one died with the disease at a 28-month follow-up.

CONCLUSION

e-TME with curative intent, though a complex procedure, is associated with high wound-related morbidity, R1 resection, but improved median survival benefit.

Abdominoperineal excision in Australasia: clinical outcomes, predictive factors and recent trends of nonrestorative rectal cancer surgery

AIM

The decision to perform an abdominoperineal excision (APR) rather than restorative bowel resection relies on a number of clinical factors. There remains great variability in APR rates internationally. The aim of this study was to demonstrate trends of APR surgery in low rectal cancer (< 6 cm from the anal verge) in Australasia and identify predictors of nonrestoration.

METHOD

This study reviewed a prospectively maintained colorectal registry - the Binational Colorectal Cancer Audit (BCCA) - from general/colorectal surgical units across Australia and New Zealand. Data were analysed to determine factors predictive of nonrestorative resection. Patients were analysed based on the presence (control) or absence (comparison) of a primary anastomosis.

RESULTS

Of 3628 patients with rectal cancer, 2096 were diagnosed with low rectal cancer between 2007 and 2017. The incidence of APR remained constant over the study period, with 58% of all resections of low rectal cancer being APR. The majority of resections were performed by consultants in urban hospitals (86% vs 14%). Tumours ≤ 3 cm from the anal verge, T4, M1 disease and neoadjuvant therapy were the greatest predictors of APR (P < 0.001). A significantly increased rate of restorative surgery was observed in public hospital settings (59% vs 41%, P < 0.05). The rate of positive circumferential resection margin (CRM) was 7.95%, with significantly increased rates in patients undergoing APR (12.2% vs 6.2%, P < 0.001). CRM positivity was increased in open approaches, T4, N2 and M1 staged disease and in an emergency/urgent setting (P < 0.001 and P < 0.045, respectively). Significantly increased wound and pulmonary complications were observed in the APR cohort (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The rates of APR in Australia and New Zealand remain high but are comparable to international figures, with one-third of rectal cancers being treated by APR. The main determinants of APR are tumour height, T stage and neoadjuvant therapy requirement. CRM positivity was higher in APR patients.